CHATUREY Vs. HIRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision under sec. 10 (2) of the Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance, against an order of the S. D. O., Dholpur, dated 20.9.1954 granting protection to the opposite -party under sec. 7 of the Ordinance.

(2.) I have heard the counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case. The only contention put forth by the counsel for the applicant before me in support of his revision application is that the land in dispute was owned jointly by the applicants and one Bhika S/o Chhitar and as Bhika had let out the field without the consent of the applicant to the opposite -party they were no better than trespassers and were not entitled to any protection under the Ordinance.

(3.) THE counsel for the applicant has frankly conceded before me that Bhika and the applicants are the joint owners of the land in dispute which is recorded in their joint khata in the revenue record. His only contention is that Bhika had exceeded his powers by leasing out the land in dispute to the opposite -party without the consent of all the joint: owners and as such the opposite -party could not be held to possess the status of a tenant.