UDEKAR BHOI Vs. MARANI BHORA RAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANT is the Appellant against a reversing judgment. Plaintiff filed the suit for a declaration that he belongs to scheduled tribe being 'Kamar' by caste on the averment that he purchased some land from the Defendant on 11 -6 -1966 and thereafter the Defendant filed a petition before the Sub -Divisional Officer, Bargarh, under Sections 22 and 23 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act (for short 'the O.L.R. Act') for declaring the sale to be void. It was specifically averred in the plaint that since the Defendant had filed an application under Sections 22 and 23 of the O.L.R. Act to declare the transfer to be void, the Plaintiff filed the present suit and the cause of action arose on 16 -2 -1979 when the Plaintiff came to know about the filing of the aforesaid application by the Defendant.

(2.) DEFENDANT in his written statement took the stand that the sale by his father was not backed by consideration and was without due permission from the revenue authorities. Since the Defendant is admittedly a scheduled tribe being 'Gond' by caste and the Plaintiff is a non -scheduled tribe, an application under Sections 22 and 23 of the O.L.R. Act had been filed. It was further averred that the suit is not maintainable and the civil Court has no jurisdiction.

(3.) MR . Misra, learned Counsel for the Appellant, contend that the suit is essentially - one which is meant to take away the effect of the decision of the competent authority under the O.L.R. Act, though it is clothed with the prayer for a declaration that the Plaintiff's caste be declared to be a scheduled tribe. Since the validity of a sale deed from a scheduled tribe in favour of a non -scheduled tribe is to be examined under the O.L.R. Act, the present suit is not maintainable. The learned Counsel further contends that the caste, Kamar' not being one described in the notification issued under the presidential order, the civil Court has no jurisdiction to declare the said caste to be a scheduled tribe. Accordingly, the impugned judgment is unsustainable in law.