ARJUN HO Vs. COMMISSIONER CHOTANAGPUR DIVISION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ application has been filed for quashing orders contained in Annexures 1 and 3 to it. Annexure 1 is an order of Additional Deputy Commissioner, Singhbhum (respondent No. 2) decreeing Kolhan Title Suit No. 43 of 1966 filed by respondents Nos. 3 to 7 in terms of the award of the panches to whom the dispute had been referred. Annexure 3 is the order of the Commissioner of Chotanagpur (respondent No. 1) dismissing the appeal of the petitioners from the aforesaid Judgment of respondent No. 2.

(2.) The entire ordersheet of the suit has been filed as Annexure 4 along with the rejoinder filed by the petitioners to the counter-affidavit of respondent No. 2. As it appears from the ordersheet, the suit was for declaration of plaintiffs' title to the lands described in Schedule 'C' to the plaint and for confirmation of the same or in the alternative, for partition of the lands described in Schedule 'B' half and half by metes and bounds. The suit was valued at Rs. 3,000/- for the purposes of jurisdiction, but only a consolidated Court-fee of Rs. 22.50 was paid. It was filed before respondent No. 2 on 5th of September, 1966. After the plaint was filed the Additional Deputy Commissioner passed the following order :-- "In view of Commissioner's order in K. M. Appeal 37/66, the suit is adjourned sine die." It appears that later on, as directed in Memo No. 1348/L dated 10th of September, 1967, the suit was transferred from the Court of the Additional Deputy Commissioner to the Court of Kolhan Superintendent and the records were received by the latter on 19th of June, 1967. On the same date he registered and admitted the plaint and issued summons to the parties to appear before him on a date fixed for the purpose. On 2nd of April, 1968, the suit was dismissed for default, but on the very date, when the parties appeared and the plaintiffs explained the absence, it was restored. The ordersheet dated 3rd of June, 1968 shows that parties prayed to refer the case to the Panchayat for arbitration. The plaintiffs suggested the name of one of the Panches, the defendants of the other and the third name that of the convener was suggested by the Kolhan Superintendent himself. However, the records could not be sent to the Panches as copies of plaint and written statement were not there and the parties were directed to file copies by 18th of June, 1968. On 18th of June, 1968 both parties were absent and the suit was dismissed for default. On the same date a petition for restoration of the suit was filed and notice was issued to the defendant to show cause against restoration by 22nd of July, 1968. The ordersheet of 22nd July, 1968 reads as follows :--

(3.) Suits filed for Kolhan area in the district of Singhbhum are governed by a set of rules known as Wilkinson's Rules. According to Rule 20 of these Rules, after a suit is filed the subject-matter may be referred to Panches for arbitration. Mr. S. K. Chattopadhyaya appearing on behalf of the petitioners has in the first place challenged the vires of these Rules and submitted that as these rules describe a procedure different from procedure followed for suits in other parts of the State, they are ultra vires. The vires of these rules was considered in Dulichand Khirwal v. The State of Bihar, (AIR 1958 Pat 366) and again in Chaturbhuj V. Ahya v. The Deputy Commissioner, Singhbhum. (1970 Pat LJR 281) and the Rules were held to be intra vires. Nothing substantial has been placed before us to show that these decisions which are binding upon us are not correct. In the circumstances the contention must be overruled.