Wanchoo, C. J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal by Roshanlal Chatur decree-holder against the order of the District Judge, Bhilwara, rejecting the prayer of the appellant for attachment and presumably sale of the khudkasht land of the judgment-debtor Manohar Singh.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the decree-holder holds a money decree for Rs. 11902/- with costs and future interest against Manohar Singh, Jagirdar of Chitamba, He put that decree in execution and wanted among, other things, to attach and presumably, sell the khudkasht land of the judgment-debtor. THE trial court held on the basis of the Kanoon Mal Mewar, that the khudkasht land was not attachable. Hence this appeal. We do not think it necessary to go into the Kanoon Mal, Mewar, for that has now been repealed by the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 which came into force on the 1st of July, 1956. For present purposes, it would be enough to refer to the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act (No. VI of 1952) and the Rajasthan Tenancy Act (No. III of 1955) which is in force since 15th October, 1955. The Jagir of the judgment-debtor has been resumed, but he has got certain khudkasht land which he retains under the provisions of Act No. VI of 1952. Sec. 10 of that Act lays down that from the date of resumption of any Jagir land, any khudkasht land of a Jagirdar shall be deemed to be held by the Jagirdar as a khatedar tenant and shall be assessed at the village rate. So under sec. 10 of Act No. VI of 1952, the khudkasht held by the applicant became his khatedari tenancy. Then we come to sec. 9 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act which defines khudkasht rights. Then there is sec. 13 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act which lays down in accordance with sec. 10 of Act No. VI of 1952 that on the resumption of a Jagir, the Jagirdar holding khudkasht shall become a khatedar tenant thereof, and he shall be entitled to all the rights conferred and be subject to all the liabilities imposed on khatedar tenant by or under the Act. Thus reading the two Acts together, it is clear that what was khudkashi land of the judgment-debtor Jagirdar has now become his khatedari tenancy. Then we come to sec. 37 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act which lays down that the rights of a tenant in a holding shall not be liable to seizure, attachment or sale by process of any civil court. As the khudkasht land of the judgment-debtor has, by virtue of the provisions of law, become khatedari tenancy and the Jagirdar has become a khatedar tenant of his khudkasht land, sec. 37 comes into play and it is not open to a creditor to attach or sell the rights of the Jagirdar through the civil court in the khudkasht which has become his khatedari holding. Therefore, whatever may have been the position under the Mewar Kanoon Mal of 1947, the present position is that the Jagirdar's khudkasht is his khatedari tenancy and cannot be attached or sold through the civil court in view of sec. 37 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. This of course does not mean that the crop growing on such khudkasht land is not liable to attachment and sale subject to any law on the point. There is no force, therefore, in this appeal and it is hereby dismissed. In view of the circumstances, we order parties to bear their own costs. .;