SYED HIMMATALI Vs. LADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed under sec. 66 of the Ajmer Abolition of Intermediaries and Land Reforms Act, 1955 against an appellate order of the learned Additional Collector, Ajmer, dated 25. 10. 57.

(2.) ON being objected to about the competency of this appeal, learned counsel for the appellant frankly conceded that there in no provision under the said Act for filing a second appeal. He therefore, prayed that this appeal be heard as a revision. This was again objected to by the learned counsel for the respondent on the ground that the said Act does not contain any such provision. We find a good deal of substance in this argument. In A. I. R. 1938 (FC) it was held that though every court of superior jurisdiction possesses inherent powers for certain purposes, we know of no authority for the proposition that a court by the exercise of inherent power can extend its appellate jurisdiction or increase its revisional authority over other courts. It was further held that the revisional and supervisory jurisdiction is entirely a creature of statute and no High Court has any inherent power of revision over the subordinate courts. This being so, we hold that we are not competent to hear this application in revision.