Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from the application of a jagirdar for recovery of rent from tenants under the Marwar Tenancy Act, 1949. The appellant, Thakur Kesari Singh, faced difficulties in collecting rent from tenants in the village of Khakharki. Following a general refusal by tenants to pay rent, the Government of Rajasthan issued a notification under Section 85 of the Tenancy Act, allowing recovery of rents as arrears of land revenue. The appellant applied to the Collector for recovery, but tenants contested the application, claiming they were entitled to a hearing. The Collector's order was upheld by the Additional Commissioner and the Board of Revenue. However, the Government rescinded the notification before the Board's decision. The High Court quashed the orders, stating that the rescission invalidated further proceedings under Section 85. The Supreme Court, however, reversed this decision, ruling that the rescission did not affect the authority to process the application made while the notification was in effect. The court clarified that Section 85 allowed for ex parte proceedings, meaning tenants did not need to be notified. The appeal was allowed, and the High Court's order was set aside, with costs awarded to the appellant.
Headnote
A) Tenancy Law - Recovery of Rent - Validity of Notification - Marwar Tenancy Act, 1949, Section 85 - The Supreme Court held that the rescission of the notification does not divest the authority to proceed with the application for recovery of rent as arrears of land revenue, as the application was made while the notification was in force. The court emphasized that the procedure under Section 85 is summary and does not require notice to tenants (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the rescission of the notification under Section 85 of the Marwar Tenancy Act affects the proceedings for recovery of rent as arrears of land revenue.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashed the High Court's order, and directed that the proceedings for recovery of rent as arrears of land revenue should continue. The court held that the rescission of the notification did not divest the authority to proceed with the application made while the notification was in force.
Law Points
- Tenancy rights
- Recovery of rent
- Ex parte proceedings
- Notification validity
- Revenue Courts Act
- 1951
- Marwar Tenancy Act
- 1949
