BHAGWATI DEVI Vs. RADHEY SHYAM AND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question was whether the Civil or Revenue Court had jurisdiction to entertain the present suit? The suit was for possession of a Kotha and a Sahen situate on an agricultural plot of land in village Ashodha, district Meerut. The plaintiff claimed that he was Bhumidhar of the plot on which the constructions stood, that he had made the constructions, but was illegally dispossessed there from by the defendants. He prayed for possession over the constructions. The trial court repelled the preliminary objection that the suit was not maintainable in the civil court. The defendants sent up in revision before the District Judge. He held that the land in suit was agricultural; that it had not been demarcated as non-agricultural land under Section 143 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and so it will not loose the character of being an agricultural land to which Section 209 of the Act was applicable. The suit was not cognizable by the civil court. He directed the return of the plaint for presentation to the proper court. Aggrieved, the plaintiff has come to this Court in revision.

(2.) SECTION 3(14) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act defined 'land' to mean (Except in Sections 109, 143 and 144 and Chapter III) land held or occupied for purposes connected with agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry which includes pissiculture and poultry farming'. Section 143 applies to use of land for industrial or residential purposes. The land so used can become non-Agricultural and case being governed by Chapter VII of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, if appropriate proceedings are taken under it and the Assistant Collector Incharge of the Sub-Division makes a declaration to that effect. Chapter VII includes Section 209 which provides for a suit in the Revenue Court for ejectment from land. So, before a land could be non-agricultural so as to be outside the purview of Section 209, it must be subject of a declaration under Section 143 (1). Else, the mere user of land or non-agricultural purposes would not preclude the applicability of Chapter VII including Section 209. In the present case no declaration under Section 143 (1) was sought for by the plaintiff or granted. Consequently, the land was covered by the definition contained in Section 3(14) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and was within purview of Section 209. In that event Section 331 (1) of the Act would come into play and no Court other than the Revenue Court mentioned in column 4 of Schedule II could take cognizance of any suit mentioned in column 3 thereof. The suit was for possession covered by Section 209 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and as such could not be entertained by the Civil Court.