PROJECT WORK

NATHU RAM (DEAD) BY LRS. V. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

Ms. Mukta Himanshu Choudhary

Assistant Professor Student

School of Law School of Law

Raffles University Raffles University

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Acknowledgment
2. Facts
3. Issue
4. Rule
5. Application
6. Conclusion
ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I take this opportunity to express our humble gratitude and personal regards to Ms. Mukta for
inspiring me and guiding us during the course of this assignment work and also for his cooperation
and guidance from time to time during the course of this assignment work on the topic.
I have prepared this assignment not only for marks but also to increase my knowledge.

Place: Neemrana -Himanshu Choudhary

INTRODUCTION

Rajasthan Tenancy Act is a special law dealing with the agriculture land in local region of
Rajasthan. This enactment is created while considering all the necessary circumstances present in
Rajasthan. Some provision creates special bar in transfer of property.

FACTS

 The legal Heirs of the appellants i.e. Nathu Ram were in possession of the land and they
have transferred it to other party which are not a member either schedule caste or schedule
tribe. But the predecessors – in interest were the member of Schedule caste. On the bases
of section 42 of Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 the concerned Tahsildar initiated
proceedings against the transferee.
 The revenue inspector was directed to dispossess the predecessors in Possession of the
property. Therefore they have also filed an application under section 175 of Rajasthan
 Tenancy Act before a sub-divisional officer. The same has been dismissed as it was beyond
the period of limitation. Section 175 provides for the procedure of ejectment from the
possession of property due to illegal transfers. In this case the Sub-divisional officer is of
the view that such application was beyond the period of limitation i.e. 12 years as the
documents for transfer was executed before 12 years by Nathu Ram. Hence the same was
rejected by the Higher Court hence they came before the Supreme Court by way of Special
Leave Petition.

ISSUE

 Whether the limitation period applies to the illegal transfer under section 42 of Rajasthan
Tenancy Act

RULE

 Section 42 of Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 creates a bar on transfer of land to any person
who is not a member of schedule tribe or schedule caste. Section 42 is as follows –
 General restrictions on sale, gift and bequest— The sale, gift or bequest by a Khatedar
tenants of his interest in the whole or part of his holding shall be void, if —
 (a) Omitted.
 (b) such sale, gift or bequest is by a number of Scheduled Caste in favour of a person who
is not a member of the Scheduled Caste, or by a member of a Scheduled Tribe in favour of
a person who in not a member of the Scheduled Tribe.
 [(bb) such sale, gift or bequest, notwithstanding anything contained in clause (b), is by a
member of Saharia Scheduled Tribe in favour of a person who is not a member of the said
Saharia tribe.]
 (c) Omitted.

APPLICATION

 The period of limitation for such transfer is of 12 years is not applicable to the present facts
because Section 42 of Rajasthan Tenancy Act provides that transfer of any kind by a
member of Schedule caste or schedule tribe is to be consider as void ab initio. Hence the
 High Court of Rajasthan erred in examining the procedure and applicability of section 175
to the facts and circumstances of this case. Similarly III Schedule clause 66 prescribe for
the period of 12 years limitation for ejectment proceedings of illegal transfers. But in the
present case the provision declare such transfer of property as void hence the period of
limitation is of Under the Third Schedule, in clause 66, for an application for ejectment for
illegal transfer or sub-letting, the period of twelve years is originally prescribed for filing
such an application from the date of transfer or sub-lease. The provision relating to the
period of limitation was later on amended with effect from 5-10-1981 and the period was
prescribed as 30 years. So far as the present transaction is concerned, the period of
limitation applicable is twelve years. The transfers being one on 2-4-1964 and another on
4-5-1964, the proper application should have been filed within twelve years, but it was
filed before the Sub-Divisional Officer only on 22-11-1976. In that view of the matter, the
proceedings were initiated beyond the period of limitation. Therefore, it was barred by
limitation and the finding of the SDO is correct which has been rightly confirmed by the
authorities right up to the High Court.

The contention of the appellant's counsel that the assignments were by itself void, therefore, the
period of limitation has no application, cannot be accepted for the reason that the specified
procedure is prescribed under clause 4(A) of Section 175 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. If only
such proceeding is initiated, the authorities are entitled to declare that such transfer executed is
void and property be resumed

CONCLUSION

The appeal was allowed and concluded that period of limitation was not application when the
transfer is by the virtue of law is void ab initio