PRATAP SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the order of Sub Divisional Officer, Udaipur, dated 7. 1. 1960, by which he has rejected the application of the appellant seeking to have corrected the entries in the settlement record over the disputed land. Obviously such an application is not contemplated under sec. 136 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act 1956. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that the prayer was also for the correction in the entries in the Annual Registers. Suffice it to say in this connection that simply because in the last para of the application a prayer to this effect was also added the application which contained only the grievances against the entries in the settlement record could not become an application for the correction of entries in the Annual Registers. If the appellant feels aggrieved with any entries in the settlement records he should go in for a regular suit. Through such an application he could have got the entries corrected only during the pendency of the record and settlement operations. Once they have been closed correction in the entries made therein cannot be obtained by an application under sec. 136.

(2.) ON behalf of the appellant our attention has been directed to 1962 RLW. (Revenue Supplement) 15 and 1962 R. L. W. (Revenue Supplement) 20. Both these cases are, however, quite distinguishable from the present case. The first case related to the correction of Khasra Teep for certain St. years. The second case also related to similar corrections The learned counsel wants to derive benefit of these Rules on the ground that in the first case it has been observed that there was no limitation provided for correction of entries and in the second case the application itself proceeded on the ground that the land had been transferred to the applicant by the mother of the person in whose name the land had been entered in the settlement. Evidently these observations do not go at all to help the appellant in this case. This appeal is, therefore, dismissed as being without any force. .