STATE OF BIHAR Vs. RAGHUNATH MAHTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Additional Subordinate Judge of Chaibassa, by his order dated 9-12-1969 passed in Title Suit No. 44 of 1968, has held that the suit in question is not cognizable by the Civil Court in view of the provision of law contained in Sections 139 (6) and 139-A of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 (hereinafter called the Act). He has directed the return of the plaint to be presented in proper Court in accordance with Order 7, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Hence, this miscellaneous (first) appeal under Order 43, Rule 1 (a) of the Code by the State of Bihar the plaintiff.

(2.) In short, the plaintiff's suit is for declaration of title, recovery of possession and correction of any entry in the record of rights. The total area of the land is 27.38 acres. The declaration of title and recovery of possession sought for is in respect of the land measuring 19.61 acres. The correction of entry is sought for in respect of 7.77 acres of land. The case of the appellant is that the respondent was a Village Headman within the meaning of the Act but he was dismissed from his office in the year 1955. In spite of his removal from the office, he has not given up possession over the land which he was occupying as a Village Headman. A portion of the land measuring 7-77 acres was acquired for construction of a road and yet a wrong entry has been made in the record of rights showing the defendant's name over that area. The balance of the land was not surrendered and possession was not given up Hence the suit.

(3.) The defence set up by the defendant, inter alia, is that he could not be dismissed from his office which was hereditary, he still continued to be the Village Headman and was not liable to be evicted from the land.