THOMAS Vs. THOMMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question concerned in this revision petition is as to the applicability of S. 32 of the Land Reforms Act. The section as amended stands to this effect: - -

(2.) LEARNED counsel argues that this section is inapplicable to the present case since here the subject matter of the suit is not one arising under and provided for by the principal Act. In other words, the argument is that the present suit is one for recovery of possession evicting a trespasser and such a suit is not one in respect of any matter arising under and provided for by the principal Act. I do not think section 108 can so glibly be got over in the present instance. The suit is not one for eviction of a trespasser. Even though the suit is so framed, it is in fact a suit to evict the varamdar whose application for fixation of fair rent is pending before the Land Tribunal. In the eye of the land owner it might appear that he is only a trespasser; but in the eye of law, as it now exists, the matter is one between the land owner and his tenant. I see no force in any of the contention. The order of the court below is confirmed and this revision petition is dismissed.