GORDHANBHAI CHHOTABHAI PATEL Vs. RAMJI MANDIR AHMEDABAD TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One of the important question of law involved in all these four revision petitions is identical. It will therefore be convenient to dispose them of by a common judgment.

(2.) The question involved is whether the jurisdiction of the Civil Court to grant an interim injunction as regards possession in relation to agricultural lands is ousted by reason of addition of clause (nb) in sec. 70 if that section is read with secs. 85 and 85-A of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1948 (which will be hereinafter referred to the Act). The aforesaid addition was made by Act No. 5 of 1973. That amendment came into force on 3-3-1973. By Ordinance No. 7 of 1973 dated 30-12-1973 there was amendment in clause (ta) of sec. 74 of the Act and by that amendment an appeal has also been provided against the order passed by the Mamlatdar under sec. 70(nb) of the Act. By Act No. 5 of 1973 sec. 85 of the Act was also amended to apply some of the provisions of the Act retrospectively for the purpose of suits in which making of reference to Tenancy Courts was necessary . It is also an admitted position that prior to the addition of clause (nb) in sec. 70 of the Act the Mamlatdar had no jurisdiction to grant such interim or temporary injunction.

(3.) This Court prior to the said amendment had an occasion to consider the question whether the Civil Courts jurisdiction to grant interim injunction was ousted on account of the position that the question whether a person is a tenant or not was to be decided by the Mamlatdar in Civil Revision Application No. 273 of 1967 decided on 5th July 1967 by my learned Brother J. B Mehta J. This contention raised on behalf of the tenant was negatived. The question therefore that is posed in all these four revision petitions whether the aforesaid addition of clause (nb) has made any change Regarding it.