1. This application in revision by the plaintiffs is directed against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Bhagalpur where by the plaint was rejected under Order 7, rule 11 (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

2. The facts essential for disposing of the present application are hereinafter stated.

3. The suit lands were bakast jote lands of the ex-landlords of Barari. At a family partition or the ex-landlords they fell to the share of Shashi Mohan Thakur. The lands being bakast were deemed to be settled with the ex-proprietor. The lands being diara lands, were subject to erosion and fluvial action of river Ganges and went down the waters sometime in 1961/62. The State Government initiated proceedings for consolidation of holdings in terms of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1961/62 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The consolidation proceedings were completed and notification to the effect was finally published on 19.1.1965. It is not disputed that in the course of the consolidation proceedings the suit lands were submerged in water. In the consolidation proceedings in the matter of preparation of upto-date record of rights in terms of section 8 of the Act, the suit lands were recorded as "Bihar Sarkar" the lands came out of water sometime in 1975. The proprietors unaware of the entry in the record of rights, assumed possession over them and wherever it was possible they grew vegetables. They also appropriated the kas and other growths on the suit lands. The petitioners purchased the suit lands by a registered sale deed or 8.9.1976 from the ex-proprietor Shashi Mohan Thakur. Having purchased the suit lands, the plaintiffs claimed to have entered into possession of the said lands. In October, 1976 the local Kramchari went at the spot and with the intent of interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs threatened them to give up possession on the plea that the lands were of the Bihar Government which had been recorded as such in the record of rights. Threatened by the attitude of the Kramchari, representing the State Govt. the petitioners filed the title suit out of which the present application arises on 12.1.1977. Notice of tae suit having been issued the State of Bihar entered appearance and filed written statement contesting the claim of the plaintiffs. Besides other pleas it was contended on behalf of the State that section 37 of the Act, was a bar to the jurisdiction of the Civil Court. The court below accepted the stand of the defendant and rejected the plaint as being barred by the provisions of section 37 of the Act. Hence the present application.

4. Section 37 originally read as follows :

“Bar for jurisdiction of Court No Civil Court shall enterain any suit or application to vary or set aside any decision or order given or passed under this Act. unless such decision or order has decided a question relating to title of land or to some interest in land as between parties having conflicting claims thereto."

The section was amended by Bihar Act, 27 of 1975. After amendment section 37 reads as follows :-

"Bar of Jurisdiction of Civil Courts No Civil Court shall entertain any suit or application to vary or set aside any decision or order given or passed under this Act, with respect to any other matter for which a proceeding could or ought to have been taken under this Act"

The submission on behalf of the petitioners is that section 37 of the Act, as it stood before the amendment was the relevant provision and in terms or that section the present suit was not barred According to the plaintiffs, the provisions of section 37 after the amendment Act, of 1975 were not relevant. In order to appreciate this submission it is essential to take notice of the subject matter of the suit. The prayer in the plaint was as follows:-

"(a) The court be pleased to bold and declare that the plaintiffs have go indefeasible right, title in the land in suit and the defendant has got abs