SARBADIA BAI Vs. ISHWARDIN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the defendants against a decree of the Additional District Judge, Urnaria, dated 15th July 1964, affirming the judgment and decree of the Civil Judge, Class II, Umaria, dated 30th November 1961.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal are that one Bharat was the Paltedar tenant of 33.35 acres of land situate in Mouza Kachhari in Tehsil Bandhogarh, and after his death holding was mutated in the name of his son Ramadhin born to his mistress Mst. Tilokiya. When Ramadhin died in 1936, the lands came in the cultivating possession of the concubine Mst. Tilokiya, and she was recognised to be the Pattedar tenant thereof, having succeeded to the holding of her son Ramadhin in her status as the mother. After her death in 1953, an application for mutation of their names was filed by her daughters' sons. During the said proceedings, one Raghunandansingh claiming to be the son of Bharat by his married wife filed an objection setting up his own claim to the holding. While retaining seisin of the mutation case the Revenue Court referred the following issue to the Civil Court under section 220 of the Vindhya Pradesh Land Revenue and Tenancy Act of 1953 (Act No 3 of !955) : "3,737 stRInjIV TcRM'I sfT STRRT t

(3.) THE first point urged in support of this appeal is that the jurisdiction . of the Civil Court to entertain the suit is barred under section 215, read with section 218(2) (i) of the Vindhya Pradesh Land Revenue and Tenancy Act, 1953. This Court, interpreting sections 250 and 257 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959, which are in pari ma'eria, held that what is cxclud- ed from cognizance of a Civil Court is a suit under section 9 of the Specific Relief Act for restoration of land to a dispossessed bhummiswami [See Nathu v. Ditbande Eussain and others, 1964 MPLJ 822.