MIHIR KUMAR JHA
Manju Singh – Appellant
Versus
Narendra Kumar Singh – Respondent
1. Heard counsel for the petitioner.
2. Counsel for the petitioner with reference to the prayer made in the plaint and also other averments would submit that the suit in question is clearly barred under the provisions of Section 43 of Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Ceiling Act). He would further emphasize that any claim for pre-emption as has been sought to be pressed in the present suit by the plaintiffs-opposite parties cannot be entertained by the Civil Court and therefore on a plain reading of the plaint itself the Court below was required to decide this aspect in terms of Order VII, Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
3. In the opinion of this Court counsel for the petitioner seems to be correct. Section 43 of the Act reads as follows :
"43. Bar of jurisdiction of Civil Court (1) Save and except as provided in this Act no civil Court shall have jurisdiction to settle, decide or deal with any question which is by or under this Act required to be settled, decided or dealt with by the Board of Revenue, the appellate authority or the Collector."
4. If the aforementioned bar agai
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.