STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. GYASIRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition, under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, the State of Madhya Pradesh has raised a question for decision whether a suit, where a dispute arises between the State Government and any person in respect of any right under S. 57(1) of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short, the 'Code') is cognizable by civil Court in view of S. 57(2) of the Code, which vests jurisdiction in Sub-Divisional Officer for deciding such dispute.

(2.) Material facts leading to this petition are thus : The respondents Nos. 1 to 5/plaintiffs filed a suit averring therein that the plaintiffs are in settled possession since last 65 years as owner and have perfected their title by adverse possession over agricultural land, situated at Survey No. 565, area 14 biswas, in village Jouri, Tehsil and District Morena. It is only on 30/05/1989 the plaintiffs came to know that in revenue records, the State is recorded as owner of the land, this entry is against the rights and title of the plaintiffs, therefore, they be declared as owner of the suit land and the orders dated 18-10-1989 and 19-10-1989 for granting lease of the suit land in favour of the petitioner No. 2 the Department of Commerce and Industries/defendant for setting up industries be declared as illegal and ineffective and a permanent injunction be issued against the defendants, restraining them not to interfere with the possession of the plaintiffs. The petitioners/defendants in their written-statement took the defence that the land is of the ownership of the State, the plaintiffs by a stray and single entry in the revenue record of Samvat 2046 in Col. 12 as that of trespassers, are not entitled to claim declaration of ownership as against the State. A plea about the maintainability of the suit in the Civil Court, based on S. 57(2) of the Code was also raised.

(3.) The trial Court decided the preliminary issue and held that the suit was not cognizable by the Civil Court. The respondents/plaintiffs preferred a revision, wherein, the order was reversed holding that suit for declaration of title and for permanent injunction was not barred u/S. 57(2) of the Code. Aggrieved by the order of the revisional Court, the Petitioners have approached this Court under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India.