BHOLA NATH DUTTA Vs. LAYA MAJHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This rule is directed against an order dated 10-8-1945, passed by the learned District Judge of Midnapur by which he rejected an application in revision made to him under the proviso to Section 10, Bengal Alienation of Agricultural Land (Temporary Provisions) Act (Bengal Act 5 [V] of 1944). The order against which the said application in revision was directed was an order dated 3-5-1945, passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer of Jhargram under Section 8(1) of the Special Act, already referred to. It is complained by the petitioner that the Sub-Divisional Officer made an order not warranted by the Act and that the District Judge, in refusing to interfere with his order, proceeded on assumptions of fact which were erroneous.

(2.) A preliminary objection has been taken to the jurisdiction of the High Court to entertain the application on which the present rule was issued. In our opinion, on the facts of the present case that objection must prevail.

(3.) The material facts are the following. It appears that on 16-8-1943, the opposite parties, who are members of an aboriginal tribe, obtained permission from the Collector under Section 49(F), Bengal Tenancy Act, to sell certain of their lands in order to procure money for the purchase of other lands. They admitted that they bad received from the petitioner a sum of Rs. 80 and, by the order granting them permission to sell the lands as prayed for, the Collector directed that the balance of the consideration should be paid in the presence of the Registrar, at the time of registration. Subsequently, on 19-10-1943, the petitioner completed the purchase and a document was executed, the consideration being Rs 250. In the kobala, the reason for selling the lands was stated to be the same as that mentioned in the application made to the Collector.