JAIRAM SINGH Vs. SETTLEMENT OFFICER CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of a proceeding for partition of a holding held by the consolidation authori ties.

(2.) ADMITTEDLY , the appellant held one third share in the holding in dispute; one third was held by respondents Nos. three and four while the remaining one third was held by Appellants Nos. 2 to 5. The consolida tion authorities proceeded to partition this holding in accordance with the admitted shares, after ignoring a decree dated 9th March, 1956, passed by the civil court in a suit (No. 892 of 1955) filed under Section 176 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for the division of this very holding. The Settlement Officer (Consolidation) held that since the civil court decree had not been enforced inasmuch as the final decree had not been passed by the revenue court the same had no binding effect. The Settlement Officer (Consolidation) confirmed the actual division of the holding made by the Conso lidation Officer.

(3.) IN present appeal, Mr. V. R. S. Chaudhary, learned counsel for the appel lants has urged that the civil court decree was binding. In 1955, when the suit for parti tion under Section 176 of the Act was insti tuted the matter was governed by Sections 176 to 182-B of the Act Dealing with these provisions a Division Bench of this Court in Nathu Singh v. Dular Singh, 1971 RD 11 held that the prescribed procedure was that a suit for partition was to be instituted in a civil court. The civil court was to grant a preliminary decree indicating the shares of the parties in the holding in dispute. After that its jurisdiction was exhausted; and the matter had to be sent to the Collector fop drawing up a final decree. It was held that the civil court had no jurisdiction to pass the final partition decree, that was a matter fall ing entirely within the jurisdiction of the Col lector.