NAND LAL Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondents No. 2 and 3 filed a suit for a declaration that the land mentioned therein has been purchased by them from Bahadur Khan and Mst. Hamidan by a registered sale deed on 29 -5 1963 for Rs. 2000/ - and claiming that they should be declared Khatedar -tenant. The suit of the respondents No. 2 and 3 was dismissed on 13 -10 -1965 by the Assistant Collector. Respondents No. 2 and 3 filed an appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority being the Appeal No. 733/1965.

(2.) IT appears that the petitioners to the writ petition also claimed that they had purchased the land from the said Bahadur Khan and Mst. Hamidan by a registered sale -deed sometime on 13 3 -1964 for Rs. 3000/ -. On the basis of the said claim a mutation was affected in their favour on 25 -3 -1964. Respondents No 2 and 3 were aggrieved and went in appeal to the Collector, who remanded the matter back for further enquin. Aggrieved against that order the petitioners filed an appeal No. 600/1966 before the Revenge Appellate Authority. The petitioners also, after dismissal of the suit of the respondents No 2 and 3 by the Assistant Collector, filed a suit under Section 183 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act (to be called as 'the Act') for eviction of the respondents on the ground that the) had no title to the land. Respondents No. 2 and 3 applied to the Assistant Collector to stay the said suit, but the same was dismissed by the Assistant Collector by his order dated 11 -8 -66. Aggrieved by that order the respondents No. 2 and 3 filed an appeal being No 926/66 before the Revenue Appellate Authority.

(3.) AFTER decreeing respondents No. 2 and 3 suit the Revenue Appellate Authority took up the appeal by the petitioners namely 600/1V66, which was an appeal against the order of the Collector remanding the mutation matter. The Revenue Appellate Authority took the view that as the respondents No. 2 and 3 have been held to be Khatedar in the suit property there was no point in continuing the mutation proceedings; and held the appeal to have become anfractuous and dismissed the same.