Jharkhand High Court
Smt. Vimla Harin vs The State Of Jharkhand Through Circle ... on 6 May, 2024
Author: Gautam Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Gautam Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Second Appeal No. 333 of 2019
------
Smt. Vimla Harin .... .... .... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand through Circle Officer, Dhanbad
.... .... .... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
For the Appellant : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Mehta, AC to GP. IV
------
Order No. 08 / Dated : 06.05.2024
1. Appellant is the plaintiff who has preferred the second appeal against
the judgment of reversal passed in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 115/2012 by
which the order passed by the Revenue Officer in CNT Act Case No. 1429/2009,
has been reversed.
2. As per the case of the plaintiff, CNT Act Case No. 1429/2009 was filed
by the plaintiff under Section 87 of the CNT Act against the final publication of
the record of rights under Section 83(2) of the CNT Act.
3. As per Haal survey, the land appertaining Khata No.741/142, Plot No.
232/250, measuring 02 decimals and Plot No.233/250, measuring 69 decimals
was entered as Anabad Jharkhand Sarkar.
4. Being aggrieved by the order, the suit was filed by asserting the
followings facts.
(i) The land in question was settled in favour of the plaintiff and he was in
peaceful possession of the same.
(ii) The land settled on 05.03.1942 by settlement No. 31 by the then Rani
Prayag Kumari Devi.
(iii) After the said settlement, revenue receipts were issued by the Ex-landlord.
5. Learned Revenue Officer allowed the suit of the plaintiff/appellant.
6. Learned first appellate Court, the Principal District Judge, Dhanbad
dismissed the suit and allowed the appeal inter alia on the ground that the said
claim by perpetual lease was on the basis of unregistered document. Neither the
name of the appellant was mutated nor Jamabandi was ever opened in his name.
The rent receipts that were filed, was of the year 1982 which could not have
been issued without a mutation order and opening of Jamabandi in the name of
the appellant. Earlier the suit land was found in illegal occupation of one Man
Bharat Puri who has managed to get Jamabandi opened in his name by collusion
of some local officials which was cancelled in Cancellation Case No. 6/2010-
2011.
7. There was no M-form filed to show that the land was ever settled by the
Ex-landlord.
8. This Court does not find any infirmity in the order passed by the
learned District Judge. Settlement is in the nature of lease which does not
transfer title of tenancy in favour of the settlee, unless it is followed by long
continuous possession. There is no document to show that after said settlement
the appellant came in possession of the land in question. After vesting neither
returns were filed nor Jamabandi was opened and rent receipt to buttress the
plea that the appellant had come in possession of the land. The learned first
appellant Court has assigned specific and cogent reason while allowing the
appeal. I do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned order.
Appeal stands dismissed as no substantial question of law is made out
for its admission.
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Pawan
