(1.) This reference is by the Subordinate Judge first class Kasumpti under Section 99, Punjab Tenancy Act (XVI [16] of 1887) because he enter, tains a doubt whether he is precluded from taking cognizance of a suit instituted in his Ct.
(2.) The pltfs. in the suit instituted in the Cfc. of the Subordinate Judge are Jagarnath & his two minor brothers Arjan and Gita Ram, and the defts. are Gayarao & his brothers Dragoo and Masania. The former are landlords of two bighas and thirteen biswas of land in village Barog Manlog, Tehail Arki, District Mahasu. Tha defts., who were tenants-at-will of the land, were dispossessed by the pltfa. The defts. thereupon filed a criminal complaint against the pltfs. which was unsuccessful. Thereafter the pltfs. filed an appln. to the Revenue Officer under Section 43 of the said Act for service on the defts. of a notice of ejectment on the ground mentioned in Clause (b) of Section 42, namely that the defts. had not a right of occupancy and did not hold for a fixed term under a contract or a decree or ordec of competent authority. Acting under Section 45 the Revenue Officer served the defts. with a notice to vacate the land or contest their liability to ejectment by instituting a suit for that purpose in a Revenue Ct.
(3.) On receipt of the notice the defts, instituted a suit against the pltfs. in the appropriate Revenue Ct. contesting their liability to be ejected. The Revenue Ct. declared the defts. to be occupancy tenants of the land under Section 8 of the Act and ordered restoration of possession of the land to them, and its decision was maintained up to the highest Revenue Appellate Ct.