SAMIKUTTY Vs. GOPALAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS claim to be jenmies of R. S.5 18 850. The respondents are holding a portion of the property as house site. It is alleged by the petitioners that the respondents trespassed upon another part of the petitioners' property in the same survey number. A suit was therefore instituted as O. S.357/1964 by the petitioners in the Munsiff's Court for ejecting the respondents from the trespassed portion. The respondents thereupon filed an application before the Land Tribunal under Act 1 of 1964, for purchase of the right of the petitioners under S.54 of the Land Reforms Act. The petitioners filed an objection before the Land Tribunal saying that they are small holders. Thereafter the petitioners filed an application for stay of the proceedings before the Land Tribunal on the ground that the questions to be decided in O. S.357/64 are the same as those to be decided before the Land Tribunal. That application was dismissed and this writ petition challenges that order.

(2.) IN the order passed by the Land Tribunal it is stated that the Land Tribunal has jurisdiction to decide the question whether the relationship of landlord and tenant subsists between the petitioners and the respondents, and that S.10 of the Code of Civil Procedure has no application to proceedings before the Land Tribunal. The tribunal has got jurisdiction to decided the question whether there is landlord and tenant relationship. If that be so, I fail to see what error of jurisdiction the Land Tribunal has committed in passing the order. The question whether proceedings should be stayed is a matter within the discretion of the Tribunal. I cannot interfere with that discretion. There is no merit in this petition. I dismiss it. No costs. Dismissed.