Skip to content


The Zamindar of Kallikote and Atagada Estates Vs. Mongolopur and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1926Mad1047; 97Ind.Cas.921; (1926)51MLJ500
AppellantThe Zamindar of Kallikote and Atagada Estates
RespondentMongolopur and ors.
Excerpt:
- .....section 171 are concerned, the only point that is raised which relates to jurisdiction is that a single member of the board of revenue has no power to decide questions under these sections'. however, under section 2 of the madras act i of 1894 it is enactedit shall be lawful for the board of revenue to declare what portion of the business of the board may be disposed of by a single member.2. it is not suggested here that the board has not allotted this branch of work to a single member and therefore that member had complete authority to deal with the matter. no other question of jurisdiction arises in the case disposed of by the board under section 1713. so far as the order passed under section 172 is concerned, it is merely a preliminary order declaring that the board of revenue has.....
Judgment:

1. These are applications to revise the orders of the Board of Revenue passed, one under Section 172 of the Estates Land Act and the others under Section 171 of the same Act. So far as the cases under Section 171 are concerned, the only point that is raised which relates to jurisdiction is that a single member of the Board of Revenue has no power to decide questions under these sections'. However, under Section 2 of the Madras Act I of 1894 it is enacted

It shall be lawful for the Board of Revenue to declare what portion of the business of the Board may be disposed of by a single member.

2. It is not suggested here that the Board has not allotted this branch of work to a single Member and therefore that Member had complete authority to deal with the matter. No other question of jurisdiction arises in the case disposed of by the Board under Section 171

3. So far as the order passed under Section 172 is concerned, it is merely a preliminary order declaring that the Board of Revenue has jurisdiction in the present case under that section but no final order has yet been passed on the merits of the case. It is contended that on this question of jurisdiction this Court ought to interfere in revision in order to save further proceedings. It is not ordinarily the practice of this Court to interfere with orders of an interlocutory nature unless there is some special reason for doing so. Here the petitioner has come to this Court before he has any grievance and consequently we are not prepared to interfere at this stage. In this view it is unnecessary to decide the question whether this Court has jurisdiction to interfere in revision with the orders of the Board of Revenue under Sections 171 and 172. All these petitions must be dismissed with costs.

4. Civil Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 1346 to 1355 must also be dismissed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //