- (1.) THIS is an application under sec. 10 (2) of the Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance, No. IX of 1949, against an order of the S. D. O. Deedwana dated 18th July, 1949. The petitioner applied under sec. 7 of the Ordinance for re instatement upon khasra numbers 7 and 13 in village Dabra, Tehsil Deedwana. The S. D. O. without holding any enquiry passed an order that the parties have agreed that khasra number 7 should remain with the applicant and khasra number 13 would remain half to half with the parties.
(2.) IT is against this order that the applicant has filed this revision petition. IT is urged by the applicant that she had not agreed to give half of khasra number 13 to the non-applicant and the S. D. O. had wrongly recorded it in his order. It was contended by the non-petitioner that the revision application which was presented after a period of about six months was time-barred and could not be entertained. My predecessor, therefore, referred this case to the Division Bench for decision whether any time limit should be observed for entertaining revision applications. The Rajasthan Revenue Courts (Procedure and Jurisdiction) Act, No. 1 of 1951 had since been passed and no period of limitation had been prescribed for presentation of revision applications. Therefore, the division bench without deciding the point of limitation sent the case back to this bench. Since no period of limitation had been fixed and looking to the peculiar circumstances of this case in which the S. D. O. held no enquiry I do not dismiss the revision application on the ground of limitation. I have looked into the record and found that the agreement referred to in the order of the S. D. O. had not been recorded in writing nor is there any proof of such an agreement having been made between the parties. I, therefore, accept the revision petition, subject to the concurrence of my learned colleague, and remand the case to the trial court for enquiry and decision on merits. Shri K. 8. Ranawat - I concur.;