ABDULLA MULLICK Vs. SAMSHER ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution and the question here is whether the appellate authority under the West Bengal Land Reforms Act has power and jurisdiction to direct the executing authority for restitution of properties which were delivered to the petitioner under an order passed by the trial authority which was subsequently reversed. The trial authority passed an order for ejectment; the appellate authority reversed it and sent the matter back to the trial authority for re-hearing. But in the meantime, the owner petitioner got possession of the property by execution of the order of the trial authority. That order being set aside, the opposite party bargadar claims restitution. The question is, to which authority should the opposite party apply for such restitution.

(2.) THE appellate authority has held that, as it is the authority which set aside the judgment and order of the trial authority, it has complete power to direct restitution.

(3.) MR. Biswas challenges this proposition. According to him, as soon as the appeal was heard the appellate authority became functus officio and the appellate authority had no further jurisdiction in the matter and having lost seisin of the matter, there was no question of exercising its inherent powers with respect to a proceeding not then pending. Mr. Biswas refers to a decision of a Bench presided over by Das Gupta, J. in (1) Bhutnath Das v. Sahadeb Chandra, reported in 66 C. W. N, page 645. The aforesaid decision supports the contention of Mr. Biswas that the appellate authority ceases to have any function after the appeal was disposed of.