SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1979 Supreme(SC) 318

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.C. GUPTA AND P.S. KAILASAM, JJ.
Raghunath (dead) by Lrs., Appellants
Versus
Kanhiya (dead) by Lrs. Respondents.
Civil Appeal NO. 1476 OF 1968,
D/- 24-7-1979.

Headnote:

Suit is barred – Suit rejection This is a plaintiffs appeal - Only question for consideration here is whether suit is barred by provisions of Madhya Bharat Abolition of Jagirs Act - In the suit the plaintiff sought to have a declaration that order of Tehsildar, which was affirmed by Collector, holding that defendant was pacca Krishak was invalid - Trial Court held that suit was barred and rejected the plaint - First Appellate Court was of view that suit was maintainable and remanded it to Trial Court for hearing on the merits – Held, High Court on a consideration of language of S. 34 of aforesaid Act held that suit was barred and order of Tehsildar could not be challenged in the Civil Court except on ground that it was a nullity - Court find no reason to differ from view taken by the High Court - Appeal dismissed.

Judgment

A. C. GUPTA, J. :- This is a plaintiffs appeal. The only question for consideration here is whether the suit is barred by the provisions of the Madhya Bharat Abolition of Jagirs Act. In the suit the plaintiff sought to have a declaration that the order of the Tehsildar, which was affirmed by the Collector, holding that the defendant was pacca Krishak" was invalid. The Trial Court held that the suit was barred and rejected the plaint. The First Appellate Court was of the view that the suit was maintainable and remanded it to the Trial Court for hearing on the merits. The High Court on a consideration of the language of S. 34 of the aforesaid Act held that the suit was barred and the order of the Tehsildar could not be challenged in the Civil Court except on the ground that it was a nullity. We find no reason to differ from the view taken by the High Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. There will be no order as to costs in this appeal.

Appeal dismissed.

For Citation : AIR 1979 SC 1936

Vikas Info Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top