MOHAMMAD NABI Vs. RAGHUNATH AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application in revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the Plaintiff against an order of remand passed by the Additional Civil Judge of Azamgarh. The Plaintiff had brought the suit for a declaration and an injunction restraining the Defendants from interfering with his possession on the allegation that he had become bhumidhar of that plot of land by virtue of the UP ZA and LR Act, No. 1 of 1951. The first court decreed the suit on the finding that the Plaintiff had become bhumidhar and the Defendants were not adhivasis of the land in suit. Before the appellate court it was urged that on account of Act XX of 1954 the UP Land Reforms (Amendment) Act which introduced Section 332 -B in the principal Act an issue should have remitted to the revenue court about adhivasis rights. The original suit was decided on 31 -10 -1953 and Act XX of 1954 came into operation on 10 -10 -1954. Thus, when the first court had decreed the suit the new Act had not come into force and the decision by the Civil court was a correct one.

(2.) SECTION 332 -B which was newly added by virtue of Act XX of 1954 reads as follows:

(3.) IT appears that by mistake the learned Counsel for me applicant had conceded that the issue should have been remitted to the revenue court. The concession was probably incorrectly made. But. there can be no concession on a question of jurisdiction But since they had made that concession are not entitled to the costs of the revision. I accordingly allow the application in revision but do not allow the costs to the applicant.