RAJMANGAL SINGH Vs. BINDHYACHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by Raj Mangal Singh, plaintiff, against the order of the lower appellate court holding that the civil court had no jurisdiction to entertain the present suit. It was at the same time directed that the plaint shall be returned for presentation to the proper court.

(2.) The material facts of the case are that Suraj Bali, father of the appellant, Raj Mangal Singh, instituted two suits before the revenue court for declaration that he was a fixed rate tenant of the two sets of plots and was in possession thereof, and that the defendants were not in possession thereof nor did they have any right or interest therein. The suits were instituted on 23.6.1953. The revenue court held that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the suits and directed the return of the plaint. Such an order was passed on 2.5.1955 and the plaints were actually returned on 5.5.1955. As fresh suits were to be filed under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, the plaintiff instituted only one suit before the civil court after incorporating all the plots in one plaint and making the necessary amendments. The amended plaint was presented before the Civil Court on 5.5.1955.

(3.) The relief sought for in the amended plaint were for declaration that the plaintiff was the fixed rate tenant and thereafter bhumidhar of the disputed plots and the defendants had no concern with them; that the defendants be restrained from interfering with the plaintiff's possession; and that in case it were found that the plaintiff was not in possession of any part of the land, he be given possession over such land.