TRIBHUWAN PANDEYA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this second appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'CPC'), the ap-pellant has challenged the legality and pro-priety of the judgment and decree dated 2-2-90 passed by the Additional District Judge, Baikunthpur, in Civil Appeal No. 4A/89, re-versing the judgment dated 17-1-84 and de-cree dated 23-1-84 passed by the Civil Judge Class-II, Baikunthpur, in Civil Suit No. 10A/ 81.

(2.) The present second appeal has been admitted for consideration on the following substantial questions of law :-

(3.) As per pleadings of the parties, one Pruthwinath Pandeya, elder brother of the appellant was in possession of the suit land admeasuring area 5.01 acres situated at vil-lage Ghughra, Tahsil Baikunthpur, then Dis-trict Surguja since 1964 till his death i.e. 1977. After death of Pruthwinath Pandeya, the present appellant as younger brother of Pruthwinath Pandeya became owner and pos-sessor of the suit land on the ground of sole surviving successor. Land was also given to Pruthwinath Pandeya in lease by Naib Tahsildar, Baikunthpur in Revenue Case No. 2A-46/67-68. Originally the land was held by Gopal Pando who has given the land to Pruthwinath Pandeya as occupancy tenant in the year 1964 for four years. In the year 1977, respondent No. 2 has initiated the proceed-ing and without providing opportunity of hearing to the appellant, passed an illegal order of ejectment against him. The appeallant has filed petition before respon-dent No. 2 for reconsideration of the case, but the same was dismissed on the ground of limitation. Finally, suit for declaration of title, permanent injunction and declaration of the order passed by respondent No. 2 as null and void was filed before the Civil Judge Class-II, Baikunthpur against respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Manmati, wife of Dalsai. By fil-ing written statement, respondents No. 1 and 2 have denied the adverse allegation and have pleaded that respondent No. 2 has acted in accordance with Section 170-A of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short 'the Code') and the revenue Courts are having exclusive jurisdiction to decide the matters covered under Section 170-A of the Code. They have further pleaded that juris-diction of the civil Court is barred under Sec-tion 257 of the Code. Original respondent/ defendant No. 3 Manmati was ex parte be-fore the trial Court.