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

1984 Supreme(Gau) 33

GAUHATI HIGH COURT
K.Lahiri, J.
Ka Trily Tariang -Appellant
Versus
U.Resdrikson Lyngdoh and Others. -Respondent
Civil Revision No 27 (H) of 1983 and 13 (SH) of 1983
Decided On : 16-03-1984

Advocates Appeared:
G.N.Sahewalla, M.Z.Ahmed, N.M.Lahiri, S.C.Das

Section 154(1) of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 does not bar civil courts from entertaining suits for declaration of right, title and interest in immovable property.

Headnote:

ASSAM LAND AND REVENUE REGULATION, 1886 - SECTION 154(1) - JURISDICTION OF CIVIL COURTS - SUIT FOR DECLARATION OF RIGHT, TITLE AND INTEREST IN IMMOVABLE PROPERTY - NOT BARRED BY SECTION 154(1) - CIVIL COURT HAS JURISDICTION TO DECIDE RIGHT, TITLE AND INTEREST TO IMMOVABLE PROPERTY - REVENUE COURT DECISION CANNOT TAKE AWAY JURISDICTION OF CIVIL COURT.

Fact of the Case:

Plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of her right, title and interest in a plot of land. The trial court and appellate court held that the suit was barred by Section 154(1) of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886, which debars civil courts from exercising jurisdiction in certain matters, including those covered by clauses (a) to (m) of the section.

Finding of the Court:

The High Court held that Section 154(1) of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 does not bar civil courts from entertaining suits based on title to immovable property. The court held that a civil court has jurisdiction to decide right, title and interest to immovable property, and that a revenue court decision cannot take away the jurisdiction of a civil court.

Issues: Whether Section 154(1) of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 bars civil courts from entertaining suits for declaration of right, title and interest in immovable property.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that Section 154(1) of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 does not bar civil courts from entertaining suits for declaration of right, title and interest in immovable property. The court held that the matters within the jurisdiction of the revenue authorities or courts could be decided by them, but no such decision of a revenue court could take away the jurisdiction of a civil courts, when a person having a right to an asset claimed entitlement to it and sought declaration of his right in the civil court notwithstanding the provisions contained in Sec. 154 (1)(a) of the Regulation.

Final Decision: The High Court allowed the petition and set aside the impugned judgment and order. The court directed the Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner to entertain the suit and to proceed on with it in accordance with the law.

The Courts below have non-suited the appellant plaintiff on the ground that Section 154(1) of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 debars the Courts to entertain the suit.

2. The Plaintiff instituted T.S.No. 2 of 1980 against the defendants in the Court of the Assistant to the Deputy Com­missioner, Jaintia Hills at Jowai praying for declaration of her right, title and interest in the plot of land fully described in the plaint. She also asked for other reliefs.

3. The Plaintiff claimed that she had inherited the suit land from her mother. After the plaintiff had sold some matured pine trees standing on the land to U. Kwor Suchiang, Defen­dant No. I lodged an application with the Revenue Officer, Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council, Jowai alleging the authority of the plaintiff to deal with the timber in the pine grove. Defendant No. 1 claimed that the pine grove, named in the plaint, belonged to him. A Revenue case was taken up and the Assistant Revenue officer passed an order in favour of the plaintiff. Against the said order defendant No. 1 preferred an appeal. The appellate authority accepted the appeal, set aside the order of the Assistant Revenue Officer and declared that the claim of the Defendant was justified. The plaintiff filed the present suit for declaration of her right, title and interest in the suit land. She sued defendant No. 1 and made the Chief Executive Member, Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council, Jowai and the Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council as party defendants. The trial Court held that in view of the decision of the Revenue Court declaring that the suit land belon­ged to Defendant No. I, the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The appellate Court also reached the same conclusion.

4. Indeed, the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code are not applicable in the area but the spirit thereof do apply under the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police. The Civil Court has undoubted jurisdiction to try all suits of "Civil nature" except those the cognizance of which is either expressly or impliedly barred. Section 154 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regula­tion, which was considered by the Courts below as bar standing in the way of the Civil Court to decide the right, title and interest of the plaintiff, reads as follows :

"154 (I). Except when otherwise expressly provided in this Regulation, or in rules issued under this Regulation, no Civil Court shall exercise jurisdiction in any of the following :-

(a) * * * *

(m) * * * *

5. In none of the orders of the courts below it is stated that the decision made by the appellate authority was covered by any of the clauses of section 154 (1) of the Regulation. The matters which are specifically set forth in clauses (a) to (m) are matters within the jurisdiction of the Revenue Court. These matters may not be triable in a civil court. However, if a decision is made in purported exercise of powers under any of the clauses of Sec. 154 (1) of "The Regulation", or if the Revenue authority acts without jurisdiction or in excess of its jurisdiction or with material irregularity causing injustice to the parties, the civil court will have undoubted jurisdiction to try the action even though it was purportedly made under clauses (a) to (m) of Sec. 154 (I) of the Regulation.

6. Be that as it may, in the instant case, the courts below could not reach the conclusion that the case fell within any of the clauses of Section 154 (1). Without reaching the con­clusion a Civil Court cannot refuse to entertain a plaint, the way in which the courts below have acted in the instant case.

7. The question of jurisdiction of the Civil Court in matters covered by clauses (a) to (m) of Section 154 (1) of the Regula­tion came up for consideration in various cases including in The State of Assam vs. Sofat Ali, AIR 1967 A & N 3 (DB). Dealing with Clause (a) of Section 154 (1), their Lordships observed :

"This does not debar the civil court from entertaining sui






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