The jurisdiction of Civil Courts regarding Thika tenancy matters is preserved for suits filed under the prior 1981 Act despite the enactment of the West Bengal Thika Tenancy Act, 2001.

JUDGMENT :

Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree passed in C.S. 245 of 1995 which was instituted by the plaintiffs/respondents herein for specific performance of contract and in the alternative for vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises at 3D, Camac Street, Kolkata and for mesne profits.

2. The claim for specific performance was given up by the plaintiffs/respondents. The suit was ultimately decreed, thereby directing eviction of the defendants/appellants as well as mesne profits.

3. Learned senior counsel for the appellant argues that the Civil Court did not have jurisdiction to decide the issue as to whether the suit property was a Thika land and whether the jural relationship between the parties was that of Thika tenant and Bharatia as well as to decide the suit for eviction of Bharatia.

4. Learned senior counsel further contends that at the juncture when the impugned judgment was passed, the West Bengal Thika Tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation) Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as “the 2001 Act”) had come into force.

5. Under Section 5(3) thereof, as amended with effect from November 1, 2010 by the Amendment Act of 2010, if any question arises as to whether a person is a Thika tenant or not or whether the land-in- question is Thika land or not, the Controller, either on his own motion or upon receiving any information may, after giving the persons interested an opportunity of being heard and after examining all such documents and particulars as may be considered necessary, enquire upon and decide such question.

6. Again, under Section 8(2) of the Act, in any question arises as to whether a person is a Bharatia under a particular Thika tenant, the Controller, either on his own motion or upon receiving any information, may, after giving the persons interested an opportunity of being heard and after examining all such documents and particulars as may be considered necessary, enquire upon and decide such question.

7. Sub-section (3) of Section 8 stipulates that any dispute regarding payment of rent by the Thika tenant to the State Government or by a Bharatia to a Thika tenant, or any case of eviction of Bharatia, shall be disposed of by the Controller in such manner as may be prescribed.

8. It is argued on behalf of the appellant that the question of Thika tenancy was specifically raised before the learned Single Judge and the learned Single Judge framed and decided such issue specifically, whereas Section 21 of the 2001 Act categorically debars the Civil Court from having jurisdiction to decide, or to deal with any question, or to determine any matter which by or under the 2001 Act, is required to be or has been decided or dealt with or which is to be or has been determined, by the Controller or the Appellate or other authorities specified in the provisions of the said Act and no order or judgment, as per the said Section, shall be passed or proceedings, including execution proceedings, commenced under the provisions of the 2001 Act shall be called in questio