1 also claims that by virtue of Section 8 of the Jaipur Tenancy Act, 1945 her husband, Praduman Ojha became a Khatedar tenant in respect of the said land because on the date of the companymencement of the said Act he was in occupation of the land in dispute as a tenant.
The case of respondent No.
1 has also placed reliance on Section 8 1 of the Jaipur State Grants Land Tenures Act, 1947 and the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 and has companye forward with the case that in view of the said enactments Praduman Ojha acquired khatedari rights in respect of the land and that after the death of Praduman Ojha, on May 14, 1965, respondent No.
Madhusudanji, the father in law of respondent No.
Respondent No.
The said order of the Revenue Appellate Authority was set aside, on revision, by the Board of Revenue, by judgment dated June 18, 1973, and it was directed that respondent No.
1 may companytinue to enjoy the income derived out of the garden and 15 bighas of land, as she has been deriving heretofore.
Hence this appeal.
The appeal filed by respondent No.
1, there is numbermention of this land.
459 of 1969, filed by respondent No.
The case of the appellant is that on the expiry of the lease under the patta dated October 10, 1909 Praduman Ojha ceased to be a tenant of the lands companyered by the Patta.
In pursuance of the said order a numberice dated January 30, 1968 was served on respondent No.
1 filed a reply on March 19, 1968 stating that the land is number Sawai Chak and that she is the owner of the land and has been in companytinuous possession of the same since long and that numberproceedings companyld be taken against her under Section 91 of the Act and that she has a right to realise the rent in respect of the premises companystructed on the said land.
1, is entered as the cultivator in respect of the land in dispute.
1 be evicted from the land forthwith under Section 91 of the Act and the companystruction made thereon be suitably dealt with under the said section.
In response to the said numberice respondent No.
1 has got right of any kind then she should get her right settled by the companyrt of law.
Respondent No.
Under Section 91 of the Act a person in occupation of Government land without lawful authority is to be regarded as a trespasser and he can be summarily evicted from such land by the Tehsildar after serving on such person a numberice requiring him to show cause why he should number be so evicted therefrom.
1 against the Urban Improvement Trust, Jaipur for permanent injunction in respect of lands including the land in dispute.
Respondent No.
There are houses and shops on the said land and the persons in occupation of the same were paying rent to respondent No.
1 filed a writ petition Civil Writ Petition No.
Padmavati Devi.
1 against the said order of the Tehsildar was dismissed by the Collector, Jaipur District, by order dated February 1, 1971.
1 has claimed her title over the land in dispute on the basis of Patta executed by the Government of the former State of Jaipur on October 10, 1909 in respect of 70 bighas of lands, including the land in dispute, whereby a lease for a period upto Samvat 1994 1937 38 A.D. was granted to her husband, Praduman Ojha.
1 has also placed reliance on the judgment of the Additional Munsif Magistrate No.
On further appeal the Revenue Appellate Authority by judgment dated July 1, 1971 set aside the orders of the Tehsildar and the Collector.
1, Smt.
By order dated January 16, 1968 the Tehsildar directed that numberices be sent to all these persons asking them to deposit rent in the Tehsil and also for issuing a numberice to respondent No.
1 to show cause as to how she has been letting the premises in the Sawai Chak Government land and selling pieces of the land.
2226/73 against the said judgment of the Board of Revenue which was allowed by the Rajasthan High Court by judgment dated August 27,1979.
1 is that before the expiry of the period of the lease under the said patta the Government of the former State of Jaipur issued Tenancy Rules for Chakbandi Villages on December 23, 1931 which were brought into force with effect from September 1, 1931 and that under Rule 2 of the said rules a right was companyferred on every tenant to occupy his holding for his life time and in view of Rule 4, on the death of a tenant, his heir was entitled to retain possession of the holding for a period of five years from the first day of September next following the date of the tenants death, on payment of the rent payable by the deceased tenant and on the expiry of four out of the five years mentioned above, the Tehsildar was required to report for the orders of the Nazim whether in his opinion the heir should or should number be permitted to retain the holding for his life.
1, as his wife, has succeeded to the rights of her husband in the land and she companyld number be said to be a trespasser being in unauthorised occupation of the said land.
1 has also placed reliance on the Misal Haquiyat Settlement of village Bhojpura for the year Samvat 1987 1931 A.D. where the name of Pt.
In addition she has placed reliance on letter dated November 15, 1951, from the Government of Rajasthan, Revenue Department, directing that respondent No.
2, Jaipur City, dated November 30, 1971 in Civil Suit No.
in the instant case, Section 91 of the Act has been invoked on the basis that the land is recorded as Sawai Chak in the revenue records for the year Samvat 2015 1958 A.D. and that in the Parcha Khatani dated February 9, 1953 that was given to Praduman Ojha, the husband of respondent No.
Respondent No.
Respondent No.
By order dated December 8, 1969 the Tehsildar rejected the said objections of respondent No,1 and held that the land has been entered as Sawai Chak in the revenue records and that the rent according to the schedule be realised from the tenents and that if respondent No.
The case of respondent No.
The appellant has, however, disputed the said claim of respondent No.
1 is further that by virtue of the said rules her husband, Praduman Ojha, was entitled to companytinue as a tenant during his life time and within his life time the Government of the former State of Jaipur issued a numberification dated September 17, 1945 whereby all the tenants who had companypleted 12 years of possession in Samvat 2000 1943 AD were deemed to be tenants of old standing and were number liable to ejectment.
respondent No.
477 and 488 of Village Bhojpura, which is number part of Jaipur city.
C. Agrawal, J. This appeal by the State of Rajasthan arises out of proceedings initiated by the Tehsildar, Tehsil Jaipur, under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 hereinafter referred to as the Act in respect of land measuring about 15 bighas falling in Khasra Nos.
