RAHIMKHAN HYDERKHAN Vs. DADAMIYA HYDERKHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff sued for a declaration that he was the eldest son of a deceased Vatandar Police Patil who died two years and a half previously, stating that the cause of the suit was that in a dispute between him and the defendant the Collector had ruled that the defendant was the eldest son and that the plaintiff's name could not be entered as Vatandar Patil unless he established his right as eldest son by a decree of the Court.

(2.) It is contended on behalf of the defendant that this suit is not maintainable by reason of the provisions of the Bombay Hereditary Offices Act (Bombay Act III of 1874).

(3.) The defendant's contention commended itself to the learned District Judge because he considered himself bound by a decision of this Court in Raoji V/s. Genu 22 B. 344 to decide that he had no jurisdiction. A reference to that decision will show that the ratio decidendi was that the case fell under Section 25 of the Hereditary Offices Act under which the duty is imposed upon the Collector of determining the custom of a vatan and what person shall be recognised as representative Vatandar, and that the relief asked for in the suit involved the determination by the Civil Court of a question which by the section was expressly reserved for the determination of the Collector.