MONIMALA BOSE Vs. BHUSANMONDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellate orders in M. P. Cases Nos. 59 and 60 of 1972 passed by the learnesd sub-divisional Officer, Burdwan on june 1973 have been challenged in these two Rules. It appears that the predecessor-in-interest of petitioners Nos. 1 (a) to 1 (i) and petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 filed an application before the Bhagchas Officer kalna giving rise to Case no. 3 of 1963 claiming share of the produce for 1368. and 1369 B. ' S. in respect of dags Nos. 385 and 439 of khatian No. 50 of Pargana Raipur, Mouza mirpur, P. S. Kalna Dist. Burdwan. In the other case being B. C. Case No. 12 of 1967 the petitioners prayed for termination of bhag system in respect of the suit lands on account 'of failure by the opposite party to deliver the bhag produce. The applications were opposed and in the-written objection it. was stated that the applicants had eight annas share in the disputed properties. The bhagchas Officer, Kalna in a trial on evidence held analogously dismissed both. the application on the ground that the petitioners had failed to establish by evidence that the relationship between them and the opposite party was that of owner and bargadar. The Bhagchas Officer considered the dispute on two,, issues, namely, (1) whether the plaintiffs had adduced "sufficient reasons to believe that the opposite party was the bargadar under them" in respect of the. suit lands and (2) whether the plaintiffs are the only owners of the suit lands. Both the issues, it appears, were found against the petitioners.

(2.) ON appeal the learned Subdivisional Officer, Burdwan was of opinion that the determination of the controversy depended upon the determination of question of title of the suit lands which the appellate authority had no jurisdiction to make. " In this view he directed the parties in appeals there from to take necessary steps in Civil court regarding the same. The rules are directed against this order. Sections 18, 19 and 21 of the West bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 are as follows : -.-

(3.) IT will appear from the above provisions' that the jurisdiction to decide any question in respect of matters referred to Section 18 (1)has been conferred exclusively, on the officer or the authority mentioned there in. The jurisdiction of all courts has been "expressly taken away in respect of adjudication of the matters referred to above. When a question of title requires to be decided in corning to a finding as to whether a person is a bargadar or not, and to whom share of produce is to be delivered, such questions under the above provisions will have to be decided by the officer or authority appointed for the purpose. If such determination of the matters referred to above involves a determination of the quantum of interest of the persons in the lands in question for receiving the bhag produce and other allied matters like, the termination of bhag system, the same shall also be decided by such officer or authority under the aforesaid provisions. The decision- in respect of such matters will be incidental to but necessary for the decision or matters which are within the exclusive jurisdiction of such officer or authority. The position will be otherwise when the rival owners clash for determination of their respective shares in- disputed lands where the bargadar is not interested or ,a necessary or proper party.