BANKEYLAL Vs. GHISULAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendant -co -sharer's appeal from the decree for village profits.

(2.) THE suit was instituted by the plaintiff -respondent as lambardar of Mahal No. 2 of mouza Kapurda for the money due by the defendant -appellant as a co -sharer on village accounts for the years 1943 -44 to 1946 -47. The following points were urged in this appeal namely: -

(3.) AT the time of the transfer, the C.P. Land Revenue Act of 1881 was in force. Under Section 74 thereof, a claim by a malguzar to hold land free from revenue as against the other malguzars of the mahal was a matter to be decided by the Settlement Officer. Under Sec. 152 (b)(9) ibid this matter was excluded from the jurisdiction of the Civil Court. A similar provision is contained in Sec. 75 of the C.P. Land Revenue Act, 1917, and the question is excluded from the jurisdiction of the civil Court under Sec. 220 (d) of the Act. It was contended that this provision is not applicable because the agreement was entered into after the 4th of November 1881, which is the date mentioned in Sec. 75. This section however, covers all agreements not excluding those which were entered into before that date. Accordingly this question could not be agitated before the Courts below, It could doubtless be referred to the Deputy Commissioner for decision under Section 106 (1)(f) of the Act, but no application in that behalf was made by the defendant as required by sub -section (3) of Section 75. In these circumstances, the defendant could not claim to hold the fields revenue -free as against the plaintiff.