LAXMAN PADHAN Vs. BRAJABANDHU MOHAPATRA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal by the Defendant is directed against the reversing judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Puri decreeing -the Plaintiffs' suit. The Respondents filed the suit (O.S. No. 373 of 1959) in the court of the Munsif, Puri for declaration of title, confirmation of possession, in the alternative, recovery of possession and for correction of has settlement of records of right. The suit property constitutes a thatched house on sabik plot No. 489 (Ac. 12 decimals) under sabik holding No. 32 corresponding to hal plot No. 548 under holding No. 84 in mauza Subalpur under Pipili P.S. in the District of Puri.

(2.) THE Defendant took the plea that his ancestors were possessing the suit -property as tenants lander the recorded owners. They constructed the dwelling house and granery on the suit -land. According to the Defendant, after the death of his father, about 40 years back, he has been in continuous possession of the suit -property. He asserts that the Hal Settlement record -of -right has been prepared after due enquiry at, the spot and with consent of the Plaintiffs. He claimed to have acquired occupancy right in the suit -property. The Defendant further alleged that in a proceeding initiated under the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 ('O.L.R. Act' for short), his claim to be declared a raiyat has been accepted by the Revenue Officer, Pipili on 27 -9 -1969. The Defendant challenged the jurisdiction of the Civil Court to entertain the suit.

(3.) FROM the provisions quoted above, it is clear that the Act provides the procedure for determination of various questions/disputes that may possibly arise between a landlord and a raiyat or a tenant. The determination of relationship or landlord and tenant is also provided under the statute. It is also manifest from the provisions that the procedure prescribed under the special statute is a complete code in itself. The correctness of the order passed by the Revenue Officer in exercise of powers in any of the provisions of this statute can be connected by challenging the same before the appellate or revisional quorums. Section 67 of the Act expressly bars the jurisdiction or the Civil Court to entertain any suit or proceeding relating to any matter which any officer or other competent, authority is empowered by under the Act to decide.