BASIRUDDIN Vs. BIBI KHALIQUE KHATOON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendants appellants have filed this Second Appeal against the Judgment and Decree of the lower appellate Court dated 28.11.1997 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Kishanganj in Title Appeal No.14 of 1994 whereby the learned lower appellate Court dismissed the appeal and thereby confirmed the Judgment and Decree of the trial Court dated 27.01.1994 passed by the learned Munsif, IInd Court, Kishanganj in Title Suit No.22 of 1991.

(2.) THE plaintiffs filed the aforesaid suit for declaration of title and possession over the suit plot and also further for declaration that the defendant second party has no right to create any red card in favour of the defendant first party and so called red card in respect of suit lands are wrong as the suit land never vested with the defendant second party. The plaintiff claimed the aforesaid relief alleging that the plaintiff purchased 15.54 acres of land of R.S. khata No.10 from the landlord Haji Ali Bux by terms of registered sale deed 24.1.1969. The State of Bihar and defendant Ist party appellants collusively brought red card in respect of 6.35 acres out of purchased land of the plaintiff. The plaintiff specifically pleaded that in land ceiling case of the year 1981 -82 whereby the lands of the vendor was acquired under the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 plaintiff was never made party. Therefore, the red card issued is illegal, fraudulent and malafide.

(3.) THE trial Court on the basis of the materials recorded the finding that the plaintiff was never made party in the land Ceiling Act and she has purchased the property on 24.1.1969, therefore, the plaintiff has been able to prove title and possession over the property and the plaintiff's suit was decreed. The defendants Ist set and second set both filed Title Appeal before the lower appellate Court being Title Appeal No.14 of 1994 and 16 of 1994. Both the Title appeals were heard together and by the common impugned Judgment and Decree, the lower appellate Court dismissed the appeal holding that the plaintiff has been able to prove title and possession over the suit property. It appears that before the lower appellate Court, the appellants raised a question regarding bar of the jurisdiction of Civil Court under Section 43 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961. Considering the provision of law and various decisions of this Court, the lower appellate Court held that the relief claimed by the plaintiff in the suit, i.e., for declaration of title and possession is not a matter to be settled or decided or dealt with by the authority under the Ceiling Act and, therefore, the appeal were dismissed.