KIRODILAL Vs. RAMESHWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision application under sec. 10(2). Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance, 1949, against the order of the S.D.O. Hindaun dated 21.3.55 granting protection to the opposite party under sec. 7 of the Ordinance.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and have also examined the record. The first contention put-fourth on behalf of the applicant before me is that as there existed no relationship of the landlord and tenant between the parties, the protection offered by the Ordinance could not be held applicable in this case. Reliance has been placed in this connection upon a single member decision of the Board reported in 1955 RRD 117. This decision is itself based upon a decision of the Rajasthan High Court reported in 1953 RLW 223. Much need not be said on the point for the question stands determined authoritatively by a full bench decision of the Rajasthan High Court - Govinda vs. Board of Revenue Rajasthan, reported in 1954 RLW 259. A number of decisions including 1955 RLW 223 were examined in this case and it was held that ''There is no reason to cut down the wide amplitude of sec. 7(1) affording protection to tenants, whether it be against ejectment by landholders or at the instance of landholders, or by third persons who are trespassers. Consequently, the protection afforded by sec. 7 of the Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance, 1949, is also available in case of dispossession of a person in occupation of the holding on or after the 1st day of April 1941, to a tenant as defined in the Ordinance, when such dispossession is made by a person other than the landholder e.g. a trespasser." Obviously this full bench decision of the Rajasthan High Court was not brought to the notice of the learned member while deciding the case referred to above. In view of the clear decision of the full bench of the Rajasthan High Court it can be held to be settled law that the protection of the Ordinance is available not only against the landholder or his agent but against a trespasser as well.