HUSAIN BUX Vs. MAHIRADHOAJ SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference by the District Judge of Jhansi under Section 289(2), U.P. Tenancy Act (XVII

(17.) of 1939).

(2.) The facts leading to the reference are these Kunwar Mahiradhoaj Singh had filed an application against Husain Bux under Section 175, C.P. Tenancy Act. This application was convested and must, therefore, have been forwarded by the Tahsildar under Section 179 of the Act to the Assistant Collector in charge of the sub-division ached the revenue officer who was an Assistant Collector of the first class. An issue of Jurisdiction was framed and decided by the Revenue officer. Normally, an appeal from a decree under Section 179, U.P. Tenancy Act, lies to the Commissioner. When this appeal, however, came to be heard before the Additional Commissioner, he was of opinion that it lay to the District Judge and. therefore, returned the Memorandum of appeal for presentation to the proper Court. A preliminary objection had been before him by the respondent, Kunwar Mahiradhoaj Singh in this connection and the Appellant Husain Bux did not contest that point with the result that the appeal was returned to be presented to the District Judge in view of a Section 265, (3) U.P. Tenancy Act. When the matter came before the District Judge, he was of opinion that the appeal did not, lie to him but to the Commissioner and, therefore, has made this reference.