Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7. It is no doubt true, as observed by this Court in State of Maharashtra v. Sharad, (1972 Mah LJ Note No. 54), that the declaration and no piecemeal declaration with regard to the items specified in Section 18 is contemplated and the right to appeal does not accrue before stage of making final declaration under Section 21(1). However, it is further held by this Court that part of declaration is appealable, though there are not two independent declarations regarding land which is surplus and land which a land-holder is entitled to retain. Therefore, in my opinion, if the provisions of Section 21 are read with Section 33 of the Ceiling Act, it is quite clear that an appeal shall also lie from a decision of the Collector making a declaration regarding the total area of land which a person is holding and is entitled to hold under the Ceiling Act. The declaration contemplated by Section 21 can also be a negative declaration to the effect that the person holds the total area of land which is less that the ceiling area itself. It is well established principle of law that an appeal is a creature of the Statute and the powers and jurisdiction of the appellate Court must be circumscribed by the Statute itself. If they are not so circumscribed then the Court of Appeal is a Court which is entitled to correct the errors in the decisions appealed from and its jurisdiction is, therefore, co-extensive with that of the trial Court. Normally there does not seem to be any fetter to its power to do what the trial Court can do. Therefore, in my opinion, the learned Member of the Revenue Tribunal was not right in holding that the appeal is not maintainable only because a negative declaration is given. This was a declaration given by the Special Deputy Collector under Section 21 of the Ceiling Act which is specifically made appealable under Section 33 of the Ceiling Act.