HARADHAN CHANGDAR Vs. JITENDRANATH HAMBIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application at the instance of the plaintiffs is directed against an order dated Feb. 28, 1979 passed in Misc. Appeal No. 52 of 1978, and raises a short though important point of law, viz., whether in a suit where a question arises as to whether a person is of is not a bargadar and the said question is referred to the appropriate Officer mentioned in Section 18 (1) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act for decision, the Court has or has not the jurisdiction to pass interlocutory orders on an application for temporary injunction.

(2.) Facts relevant for the present purpose are simple. The plaintiffs instituted the suit for declaration and for permanent injunction against the defendant No. 1 upon a claim that the suit lands were in the khas possession of the plaintiffs, that the defendant No. 2 was engaged as a care-taker to supervise the cultivation of the lands from the time of the predecessors-in-interest of the plaintiffs, that the defendant No. 1 who is a nephew of defendant No. 2 managed to have his name recorded as a bargadar in respect of the suit lands in the draft records prepared during the revisional settlement operation and that he on the basis of such entry in the draft record but without having any interest whatsoever in the suit lands, was trying to disturb the possession of the plaintiffs.

(3.) Defendant No. 1 however, claimed to be a bargadar under the plaintiffs and alleged further that defendant No. 2 was in collusion with the plaintiffs.