CHAKIRI SUBBAYYA Vs. LADE SREENIVASA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Civil Revision Petitions raise a question of jurisdiction. The connected suits were brought by the Shrotriemdar to recover rent for Faslis 1327, 1328 and 1329 and were filed in the District Munsif's Court of Madanapalle. The defendants, who are the petitioners in the High Court, contend that these suits, being suits brought by a landholder of an estate to recover arrears of rent, are exclusively cognizable by a Revenue Court.

(2.) Under Act VIII of 1865, Section 1, Shrotriemdars fell under the category of landholders and could proceed against their tenants before the Collector for recovery of rent, provided that they had taken written leases or muchilikas from them, but they might themselves be the tenants of a superior landlord [vide Rama V/s. Venkatachalam (1885) ILR 8 M 576 and Suryanarayana V/s. Appa Rao (1892) ILR 16 M 40 : 2 MLJ 249] Under Section 87 suits for arrears of rent could also be instituted in Civil Courts.

(3.) Under Act 1 of 1908 not all Shrotriemdars and Inamdars are landholders, but only those who at the time of the grant did not own the kudivaram, in other words, the share of a tenant with a right of occupancy. Under Section 189 the jurisdiction of Civil Courts to try suits by landholders to recover arrears of rent is taken away.