RAJE VYANKATRAO JAGJIWANRAO DESHMUKH Vs. SITALPRASAD SIVNATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question referred to the Full Bench as slightly reformulated by us is as under: Whether in view of the fact that no notification under Section 2(j) of the Berar Regulation of Agricultural Leases Act, 1951 (No. XXIV of 1951) appointing any Revenue Officer to discharge the functions of a Revenue Officer under Section 16 of that Act has been issued, the Civil Court's jurisdiction to decide the question referred to in Sub -section (1) of this section is ousted ?

(2.) THE facts of the two suits, which have given rise to this reference, are briefly these: The plaintiff had filed the two suits for obtaining possession of the lands from the defendants and for eviction of the defendants. In each suit, he alleged that the defendant was a trespasser and that he had forcibly taken possession of the land. The defence was that the plaintiff had entered into an oral agreement with each defendant, by which the land had been leased to the defendant, that the defendants had acquired the rights of protected lessees under the Berar Regulation of Agricultural Leases Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), and that, consequently, the plaintiff had no right to evict them from the lands. It was also contended that the question whether they were protected lessees could only be decided by a Revenue Officer under the Act and that the Civil Court had, therefore, no jurisdiction to decide the suits. Both the trial Court and the First Appellate Court have found that the defendants were trespassers and that they had forcibly entered upon the lands. These Courts also took the view that in the circumstances it was not necessary to refer any question for decision to a Revenue Officer under the Act. Against these decisions, second appeals were filed in this Court. These came up for hearing before a Single Judge of this Court. It was urged before him that as no Revenue Officer had been appointed to decide questions of the kind referred to in Sub -section (1) of Section 16, the Civil Court was competent to decide the two suits. This argument was not accepted, as in the opinion of the learned Judge, even though no notification had been issued by the State Government under Section 2(j) of the Act, the Deputy Commissioners and Sub -Divisional Officers were competent to decide such questions. He, therefore, reversed the decisions of the lower Courts and directed that, in each suit, the question whether the defendant was a protected lessee should be referred to a Revenue Officer for decision. Against the decisions in these two second appeals, Letters Patent Appeals were filed. The Division Bench, before which these appeals came up for hearing, has referred the question mentioned above for consideration by a Full Bench.

(3.) THERE has been some argument before us as to what the words 'that provision' mean. It has been urged by Mr. Kherdekar that these words refer to the Berar Land Revenue Code and that they have no reference to the words 'any provision of this Act' in the opening part of the definition. In this connection, our attention has been invited to certain provisions of the Code. Section 3 of the Code states that there shall be the following classes of Revenue Officers : Deputy Commissioners. Assistant Commissioners of the first and second grade. Tahsildars. Naib -Tahsildars. The section further provides that the term 'Assistant Commissioner' includes 'Extra Assistant Commissioner'. Section 7 provides that the State Government shall appoint in each district a Deputy Commissioner who shall exercise therein the powers and discharge the duties conferred and imposed on a Deputy Commissioner or a Collector by this law or by any enactment for the time being in force. This section, therefore, provides for the appointment of a Deputy Commissioner in each district. He can, however, exercise only such powers and discharge such duties as are conferred and imposed on him by the Code or by any enactment for the time being in force. Section 7 -A provides for the appointment of an Additional Deputy Commissioner. Sub -section (3) of this section states that an Additional Deputy Commissioner shall exercise such powers and discharge such duties conferred and imposed on a Deputy Commissioner or a Collector by this law or by any enactment for the time being in force, as the Deputy Commissioner of the district may direct. Section 8 states that an Assistant Commissioner shall exercise such powers as the State Government may, by notification, direct. Sub -section (2) of Section 9 states that the Tahsildars and the Naib -Tahsildars shall exercise the powers and discharge the duties conferred and imposed upon them by or under this law or any enactment for the time being in force. Section 10 states that the State Government may appoint such other officers and invest them with such powers as may be necessary to give effect to the provisions of this law. Section 11 states that an Assistant Commissioner, who is placed in charge of one or more sub -divisions of a district, shall be called a Sub -Divisional Officer and shall exercise such powers of a Deputy Commissioner as the State Government may, by notification, direct. In exercise of the powers conferred on the State Government by Sections 8 and 11, notifications have been issued by the State Government. No notification of the State Government is, however, required in regard to the powers to be exercised and the duties to be discharged by a Deputy Commissioner, Tahsildar or Naib -Tahsildar. Under Sections 7 and 9 these officers can exercise such powers and discharge such duties as are conferred and imposed upon them by the Code or by any law for the time being in force.