MOTILAL Vs. SHRIMATI PARBATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two applications in revision against a decision of the learned Divisional Commissioner, Kota, dated 6. 8. 58 in two separate cases, shall be disposed of by this single judgment as a common point of law is involved in them.

(2.) MOTILAL and Shrimati Bilu applied for the acquisition of Khatedari rights in land which was in the Khatas of Shrimati Parbati Devi and Chandra Kala respectively under sec. 10 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, Both the applications were rejected by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bundi, on the ground that the opposite party being widows the applicants could not acquire the Khatedari rights as provided in sec. 46 (1) (b) and proviso (b) of sec. 19 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. In appeal it was urged before the learned Commissioner that, as the land was originally held by the applicants from the husbands of the opposite party and not from the present ladies, the case was not covered by the above mentioned provisions of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. This contention was ruled out by the learned Commissioner on the ground that the words 'held by' in Proviso (b) of sec. 19 of the Act, meant the position as it exists on the date of the application and not what it was sometime in the past. This interpretation, in our opinion, is correct. It may be that the sub-tenancy may have been created by the husbands of the opposite party but as the applicants have applied for the acquisition of the Khatedars, rights in respect of the land of which the opposite party are the present Khatedars, the cases shall come within the mischief of proviso (b) of sec. 19. read with sec. 46 (l) (d) of the Act. The view taken by the learned Commissioner is, therefore, correct and does not call for any interference in revision. Accordingly, we dismiss both the applications in revision. .