RAMESHWAR THAKUR Vs. BHAGWATI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application in revision is at the instance of the plaintiffs whose plaint in Title Suit No. 3 of 1979. instituted for a declaration in respect of the deed of gift as being void and fraudulent, etc., has been rejected by the learned Subordinate Judge by applying Section 4 (b) of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Act") on the ground that, by virtue of the aforesaid provision the suit was not maintainable.

(2.) The Stamp Reporter had raised objection to the maintainability of this application under Section 115 of the Civil P. C. in view of the definition of the term 'decree' in Section 2 (2) read with Order VII, Rule 11 (d) of the Civil P. C. The question of maintainability was left open to be urged at the time of the final hearing of the application by the learned Judge admitting this application. Accordingly, when this application came up for hearing before a learned single Judge of this Court, he referred this case to a Division Bench and it is how it is placed before us.

(3.) The question of jurisdiction or maintainability of this application arises in this way that, if it is held that the impugned order was appealable then obviously that lay before the lower appellate Court and the present application in revision would be barred as provided under Section 115 (i) of the Code. In order to appreciate the question falling for our consideration it is necessary to refer to the relevant provisions of the Civil P. C. and the Act. Section 4 of the Act deals with the effects of the notification under Section 3 (i) and contemplates various consequences and one of the consequences is contemplated under clause (b) which reads as follows:--