SHER ALI KHAN Vs. SHEODEV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been filed under sec. 187 of the Ajmer Tenancy and land Records Act, 1950, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against an order of the Additional Collector Ajmer, dated 16.8.1956 passed in a case submitted to him by the S. D. O. Ajmer for confirmation under sec. 182 of the Act.

(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the record as well. A short and simple point is involved for determination in this revision. The opposite-party made an application to the trial court under sec. 43 of the Act for declaration of his status as a tenant and for grant of permanent injunction. This application was rejected by the trial court on the ground that the land being included in Bhom no tenancy rights could accrue in it, The Additional Collector took a different view and hence this revision. The learned counsel for the applicant has argued before us that sec. 36 of the Ajmer Land Revenue Regulations (II of 1877) contained restrictions against alienations by Shorn grantees by way of sale, gift, lease etc. and as such no tenancy rights can legally accrue in Bhom land. It was also argued that sec. 2(2) of the Act makes a mention of conditions included within a Jagir or Istimrar Sanad and as such the word 'Bhom' is not to be found in it. The contention is that these provisions do not apply to Bhom Sanad. WE feel no hesitation in observing that there is no substance in either of these contentions. As rightly pointed out by the learned Addl. Collector Ajmer sec, 2 clearly lays down that when the Act comes into force in Ajmer so much of any Act, regulation or notification in force therein or any condition of a Jagir or Istimrari Sanad as is inconsistent with this Act shall be deemed to have been repealed or superseded by the Act The word regulation is wide enough to include Regulation II of 1877. The term 'Jagir' has been used in a generic sense and is inclusive of all categories of State-grants including Bhom, Sanadi, Istimrardar, non-Sanadi Istimrardar. Sec. 22 of the Act lays down that every person who is at the commencement of the Act a tenant of land other than an ex-proprietary tenant, an occupancy tenant or a sub-tenant shall be called an hereditary tenant subject to the provisions of sec. 23 of the Act. The Bhom lands have not been excluded from the operation of this section. As laid down in sec. 1 of the Act it extends to the whole of the State of Ajmer. There is no justification for the interpretation that is sought to be put by the applicant on these provisions. It is an admitted fact that the opposite-party holds land under the applicant and is liable to pay rent therefor. WE, therefore, hold that the learned Additional Collector came to a correct conclusion in the case. The revision is hereby rejected.