Law:

Section:

Kabuli rights-------   ----Lessee of purchaser cultivating rice purchase in violation of condition imposed by Barrage Department-Lessor not aware of cultivation of rice-Land forfeited-Held that land could be restored on payment of 1 times assessment.     ORDER   This is a revision -petition from Haji Jumo against the order dated 11-10-1961 of the Additional Commissioner, Hyderabad Division.   2. The facts are that S. Nos. 339 and 341 of Deh Bhitaro and S. Nos. 236 and 556 (37-30 acres) of Deh Phant, were pur chased by the petitioner's father in 1947 from Praim Chand, who had acquired kabuli rights from the Barrage Department subject to the condition, that he will not raise rice cultivation, without the permission of Revenue Authority. About 6-7 years ago the petitioner's father leased out the disputed S. Nos. to one Haji Allah Bachayo on the condition that he will not cultivate the rice crop. The lessee raised rice cultivation in the disputed land, without the knowledge of the petitioner. According to the peti tioner Haji Allah Bachayo his father's Lessee, suddenly received notice on 9th September 1955 that the land comprised in the above four S. Nos. had been forfeited due to rice cultivation against the restrictions. At about that time his father also happened to die. Their lessee (Haji Allah Bachayo) filed a petition, dated 7th February 1956 on behalf of his father, against the order of the D. C. Tharparkar, forfeiting the above lands. The Addi tional Commissioner, Hyderabad, rejected that appeal summarily under his order No. S-13-3-10-F/55, dated 10th May 1960, in the following terms :-   "It is observed that the appellant had raised rice cultivation in the land unauthorizedly for which offence his land was rightly forfeited. His appeal is, therefore, rejected.   There is no reference to any law or instructions, which would make it clear that in such cases the land is to be restored on payment of 1 times assessment. The C. O. S. B. also in his No. MB/R-2668 of 1960, dated 19th March 1960 to B. M. Mir pur Khas stated that he was-   "pleased to refuse the request of the applicant for restoration of…