Back
2016 Supreme(Cal) 944
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
SAHIDULLAH MUNSHI, J.
Netai Chandra Das – Appellant
Vs.
Jhantu Panja and others – Respondents
C.O. 2553 of 2010
Decided on : 10-08-2016
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sandip Roy Chowdhury, Ms. Madhumita Patra, Ms. Pranjalika Biswas
For the Respondents: Mr. Amitava Pain, Mr. Partha Pratim Mukherjee
In a suit involving a dispute over the status of a defendant who claims to be a bargadar, the court's jurisdiction is not ousted merely because the question of status is referred to the prescribed authority under Section 21(3) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955.
Headnote:
BARGADAR STATUS - WEST BENGAL LAND REFORMS ACT, 1955 - SECTION 21(3) - REFERENCE TO AUTHORITY - COURT'S JURISDICTION NOT OUSTED - STATUS QUO ORDER CAN BE PASSED.
Fact of the Case:
Defendant filed an application under Section 21(3) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, claiming to be a bargadar of the suit property. The trial court did not refer the matter to the authority under Section 18(1) of the Act and passed an order of injunction.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the trial court erred in not referring the matter to the competent authority under Section 18(1) of the Act to determine the status of the defendant as a bargadar.
Issues: Whether the trial court was correct in not referring the matter to the competent authority under Section 18(1) of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: Section 21(3) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 mandates the court to refer the question of whether a person is a bargadar to the authority under Section 18(1) of the Act for decision.
Final Decision: The court set aside the trial court's order insofar as it related to the consideration of the application under Section 21(3) of the Act and affirmed the order of temporary injunction.
2. The defendant no.2, Netai Chandra Das, is the petitioner in the present revisional application. The opposite party filed a suit for declaration and injunction before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Second Court at Chandernagore, District Hooghly which was registered as Title Suit No. 6 of 2010. In the said suit the plaintiffs made the following prayers :
“(a) That the plaintiffs are the 16 annas owners of the demarcated A Schedule property and the defendants have got no right, title, interest and possession therein.
(b) For a decree of further declaration that the defendants are the 16 annas owners of the demarcated B Schedule property and they have got no right, title interest beyond their purchased property.
(c) For a order of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession of the Pltfs. In the A Schedule property and from making any attempt to harvest the crops cultivated by the pltfs.
(d) For cost of the suit.
(e) For any other relief/reliefs to which the plaintiffs are entitled to under the law and in equity.”
3. The prayers so made by the petitioners are in respect of demarcated 20 decimals suna property in the southern portion of L.R. Plot No. 1179, L.R. Khatian Nos. 1146 and 1147 under Mouza Baburbheri, P.S. Singur, District Hooghly. The defendant nos. 1 and 2 have filed a combined written statement wherein it has been stated that the defendant no.1 is the joint owner of 8 decimal of the suit plot and the defendant no.2 is the bonafide bargadar of the suit property and that the defendant has every right to cultivate the suit property.
4. In the Court below the defendant no.2 filed an application under Section 21(3) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 and raised an objection that since he is a bargadar in respect of the suit property and miscellaneous proceeding is pending before the B.L.& L.R.O. for decision as to whether he is a bargadar in respect of the land in question, the learned Court ought to have referred the matter before the authority under Section 18(1) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). The provision of Section 21 prescribes a bar of jurisdiction and it says :
“21. Bar of jurisdiction.- (1)[***] No order or other proceedings whatsoever under this Chapter shall be questioned in any Civil Court and no Civil Court shall entertain any suit or proceeding in respect of any matter mentioned in [sections 17, 18, 19B and 20B].
(2) On the appointment of officer or authorities under this Chapter all proceedings pending before any Bhagchas Conciliation Board established under the West Bengal Bargadars Act, 1950, shall stand transferred to the officer or authority have jurisdiction over the area in which the land, to which the proceedings ralate, is situated.
(3) If any question as to whether a person is or is not a bargadar arised in the course of any [suit, case, appeal or other] proceedings before any Civil or Criminal court, the Court shall refer it to the officer or authority mentioned in sub-section (1) of section 18 [for decision and such Court shall dispose of the suit, case, appeal or other proceedings] in accordance with the decision communicated to it by the officer or authority mentioned in sub-section (1) of section 18 to whom the question was referred.]
(4) On a reference being made under sub-section (3) of this section to the officer or authority mentioned in sub-section (1) of section 18 or decision, such officer or authority shall personally made such enquiry as may be prescribed, shall arrive at a decision after giving all the parties to the suit, case, appeal or other proceedings an opportunity of being heard and shall communicate his or its decision in the prescribed manner to the Court wh
