ADHAR CHANDRA MONDAL Vs. BISTU PADA GURE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two rules at the instance of the Defendant petitioner are directed against two orders passed by a Small Cause Court Judge decreeing the Plaintiff's suits for the recovery of Rs. 500/-as the price of barga produce on the basis of a registered Kabulayat. The rules were heard analogously.

(2.) The short point that has arisen for decision is whether the Court concerned had jurisdiction to try the suits.

(3.) Under Section 7(1), West Bengal Bargadar's Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) every dispute between a bargadar and the owner regarding the division or delivery of the produce shall be decided by a Board established for the local area within which the land concerned is situated. Under Section 9(2) of the same Act no Court shall entertain any suit in respect of a matter required under Section 7(1) to be decided by a Board referred to in that sub-section. Under Section 18 the provisions of the Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any other law, etc. The cumulative effect of these provisions is obviously that the only forum available for the settlement of every dispute relating to matters mentioned in Section 7 (1) in the instant case the dispute is regarding the division or delivery of the produce is the Bhag Chas Conciliation Board established for the area concerned and no Court shall entertain any suit required to be decided by the Board. Under Section 1(2) the Act extends to the whole of West Bengal. Legislature has not left it to the sweet will or option of the Executive to decide whether any area of West Bengal should be left out of the purview of the Act or the statutory machinery as provided for in Section 7(1) is to be established in any parlicular area or not. What, however, is to happen where, as in the present case, no Board has been established by the Government for the local area in question? Is the jurisdiction of the Civil Court taken away even in a case like that?