P.C. Bhattacharya vs Official Receiver, Ajmer

Nigam, J.C.

This is a reference made by the learned Assistant Commissioner and Collector, Ajmer, under S. 196, Ajmer Tenancy and Land Records Act, 1950 (No. 42 of 1950).

The facts of the case appear to be that in a proceeding before the Insolvency Judge, a reference on a question of tenancy was made to the Sub-Divisional Officer. The Sub-Divisional Officer had another proceeding pending before him which also raised the question of tenancy. Instead of considering the two cases separately, the learned Sub-Divisional Officer appears to have consolidated the proceedings so far as the determination of the question of tenancy was concerned. Having come to his decision, he transmitted his finding on the question of tenancy to the Insolvency court and also proceeded to dispose of the revenue proceeding pending before him. A reference under S. 182 of Act 42 of 1950 has been made by the Sub-Divisional Officer to the learned Assistant Commissioner and Collector for confirmation of his proceedings. The learned Assistant Commissioner has felt doubtful about his competency to deal with the matter. I have heard the learned counsel for P.C. Bhattacharya and the learned counsel for Official Receiver.

I see no difficulty in the matter. The case was decided by the revenue court and a reference under S. 182 has been made to the learned Assistant Commissioner. The learned Assistant Commissioner is fully competent to deal with the matter. The fact that the same question has arisen in another suit does not oust the jurisdiction of the learned Assistant Commissioner. It may be that the question of res judicata may be urged before him, but that does not oust his jurisdiction to deal with the reference made to him under S. 182 of Act 42 of 1950.

I, therefore, direct the learned Assistant Commissioner and Collector, Ajmer, to proceed, with the case further. There will be no order as to costs in these proceedings.