PARAMJIT SINGH DHILLON Vs. HARINDER SINGH GHUMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge of this Court, dismissing his application for rejection of the suit. The learned Single Judge notices that the appellant/defendant's claims for rejection of the suit, encompasses this Court in Delhi and Punjab and that the suit is a suit for partition for properties situated in Delhi as also in Punjab and some of them were agricultural properties. The learned Single Judge considered the application framed issues, and has pressed his opinion in the following terms:

(2.) Mr. Sachin Datta, learned senior counsel appearing for the Appellant specifically relies upon Rule 3 of the Delhi High Court Rules, Part B, to say that the courts can entertain the suit relating to the dispute as to title and revenue assessed land in a partition proceeding, when the revenue officer declines to determine the question as though he were a Civil Court and, refuses to partition until the question is determined by a competent Court."

(3.) The learned senior counsel also relied upon Section 158 read with Section 117 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (hereinafter "PLR Act") to submit that there is a threshold as to the maintainability of the suit before this Court, as it predominantly involves agricultural land for which local courts initially have exclusive jurisdiction.