UIT ALWAR Vs. B.O.R. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE both the instant intra -court appeals have been preferred against the self same judgment of the learned single Judge impugned herein dt. 30.08.2011, hence heard together and being disposed of by the present common order.

(2.) THE brief facts are that a suit came to be filed by Tehsildar on behalf of State of Rajasthan in respect of suit land in the court of Sub -Divisional Officer, Alwar on 30.11.1968. It reveals from the material on record that the suit land was purchased by one Banarsi Das on 06.01.1949 from the erstwhile Biswedar and the predecessor -in -title of respondent Ram Narayan purchased the suit land by registered sale deed on 19.02.1955 from Banarsi das and thereafter mutations No. 125 and 195 were opened in favour of the predecessor -in -title of the respondent Ram Narayan on 05.09.1956.

(3.) HOWEVER , the State Government was of the view that as a result of coming into force of the Rajasthan Zamindari and Biswedari Abolition Act, 1959 (Act, 1959), the suit land in question being Banjar and having vested with the State, the State Government became owner of the suit land and Ram Narayan was a trespasser and accordingly proceedings were initiated u/s. 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 against Ram Narayan in respect of suit land in question but those proceedings were dropped by the Tehsildar vide order dt. 28.12.1965, at the same time application was submitted by the deceased Ram Narayan, the predecessor -in -title for recording of their names in the settlement operation and that came to be allowed under the order of Settlement Officer dt. 15.01.1965 and the name of Ram Narayan was entered in the revenue records and that appears to be a reason for which the Tehsildar dropped the proceedings initiated u/s. 91 of the Land Revenue Act, 1956 for eviction of the trespasser vide order dt. 28.12.1965. However, the State Government decided to file a suit against the predecessor -in -title of the respondent Ram Narayan and the suit was filed by the State for correction of entries in the revenue records as a consequence of settlement operation. The defendant Ram Narayan filed written statement giving complete details or the subject land and controverting the averments made in the plaint and raising further objections that it was not open for the State to file a suit seeking correction of entries and apart from other objections it was stated in the additional pleas that the suit is not maintainable as the suit land is in possession of the defendants on which constructions have been raised and without making prayer for returning of the possession the suit is not maintainable.