JANGALI TEWARI Vs. NAUBAT TEWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a second appeal from the decision of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge of Ballia. The plaintiffs brought a suit for a declaration of title as grove-holders of certain groves; and alternatively for possession. I do not need to go into the facts of this case, as I am deciding it upon a preliminary point. The plaintiffs suit was decreed by the lower appellate Court, and the defendant appeals. The appellant in appeal urges that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to hear the case. He relies upon Section 121, Agra Tenancy Act, 1926. That section is as follows: At any time during the continuance of a tenancy the tenant of a holding may sue that land holder, or any person claiming to hold through the land holder, whether as tenant or rent free grantee or otherwise, for a declarations of his right as tenant.

(2.) If the suit comes under this section, Schedule 4, Group B, No. 15, bars the Civil Court from having jurisdiction to hear it. According to the Full Bench decision of In re Ananti V/s. Chhannu , the jurisdiction of the Court is decided by the-plaint. The defence cannot be looked at for this purpose. I therefore turn to the plaint in this case. Para. 11, is as follows: Eight months ago the plaintiffs came to know that for some years past the defendant has wrongly been getting his name entered in the revenue papers by the patwari of the mahal against the entire groves in dispute.

(3.) Paragraph 12: On getting information of the wrong entries the plaintiffs made an application to the Revenue Court for removal of the defendant's name and for the entry of their own name. The defendant set up a defence denying the plaintiffs right and alleging their own right and possession. On 31 March 1930 the Revenue Court summarily dismissed the plaintiffs application on wrong grounds.