RAHMAT Vs. GANESHI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The proceedings which have given rise to this appeal were taken under Section 154, Agra Tenancy Act, by one Ganeshi Lal who claimed to be the zamindar of these plots of land specified in the plaint. The defendants to the suit were Ramzan Shah and others. The case of the plaintiff, as disclosed in the plaint, was that these defendants were holding the lands in suit rent free in lieu of their services for the maintenance of a takia. In para. 2 of the plaint a statement was given of the specific services which the defendants were liable to render and it was alleged that the defendants had ceased to render these services. In paragraph 3 of the plaint it was said that the plaintiff no longer desired to have these services rendered.

(2.) By way of reply the defendants put forward the case that the land was not resumable as it was not muafi in lieu of services but was a charitable muafi. And in paragraph 4 of the written statement it was pleaded that the defendants having been in possession for more than fifty years and for more than two generations they were not liable to be ejected. The Court of first instance decided in favour of the defendant; the lower appellate Court has decreed the plaintiff's suit.

(3.) It has been argued in the first place that the learned additional District Judge had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal from the decision of the Assistant Collector, and this argument is based on the provisions of the Schedules to the Tenancy Act, Schedule 4, group C, Serial No. 36. Group C certainly relates to suits which are triable by Assistant Collectors of the 1 Class and from which an appeal lies to the revenue Court. So prima facie an appeal in a case brought under Section 154, Tenancy Act, would be to the revenue Court.