MANSAI Vs. BALI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been admitted for consideration on the following substantial question of law: -

(2.) The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title that he is owner of the schedule land shown in Schedule B attached with the plaint and the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer dated 8-3-1994 reverting the land in favour of defendants No.1 to 3 legal representatives of Madhuva, and further the order of the Collector affirming the order of the SDO dated 8-3-1994 are unsustainable and bad in law and are beyond jurisdiction, as they have purchased the suit land by registered sale deeds dated 2-3-1962 (Ex.P-1) and 30-1-1961 (Ex.P-2).

(3.) Defendants No.1 to 3 by filing written statement controverted the facts mentioned in the plaint stating inter alia that it was a Benami transaction and it does not confer any title to the plaintiff and the jurisdiction of the civil court is barred under Section 257(l-1) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short, 'the Code') in case arising under Section 170-B of the Code.