Back
2005 Supreme(J&K) 340
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT Jammu
J.P. Singh, J.
Zulfkar Ali Shah - Appellant
Versus
Alam Shah & Ors. - Respondent
Civil Revision No. 171/2004
Decided On : 01 December, 2005
Advocate For Appellant: Babu Ram
Advocate For Respondent: J.A. Kazmi
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the powers and jurisdiction of Revenue Officers and the bar of jurisdiction for Civil Courts under the Agrarian Reforms Act.
Headnote:
Jurisdiction - Agrarian Reforms Act - Section 19 - 19(3)(e) - 19(4) - 25 - 27 - Rule 58 - Powers of Revenue Officers - Suit for injunction - Transfer of case to Collector - Interpretation of legal provisions under Agrarian Act
Fact of the Case:
The court addressed the transfer of a suit titled Zulfkar Ali Shah and ors. Versus Alam Shah and ors. from a learned Munsiff to the Collector (SDM, Mendhar) under the Agrarian Reforms Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the suit was triable by the authorities under the Agrarian Reforms Act and that the transfer of the case to the Collector was appropriate. It rejected the petitioner's argument that the suit for injunction was not cognizable by a Collector and that the Collector had no jurisdiction to issue injunction under the Code of Civil Procedure.
Issues: The issues involved the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts, the powers of Revenue Officers under the Agrarian Act, and the interpretation of Section 19 and related rules.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of Section 19(3)(e) and other relevant provisions of the Agrarian Act, which demonstrated that all cases concerning land falling within the definition of the Act were required to be tried by a Collector. The court also emphasized the powers of Revenue Officers and the bar of jurisdiction for Civil Courts under Section 25.
Final Decision: The court rejected the Civil Revision Petition, affirming the transfer of the case to the Collector and upholding the jurisdiction of the Collector to deal with the dispute.
2. Shri Babu Ram Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that learned Munsiff has erred in holding that the suit was not triable by the Civil Courts. He relies on Subhan Dar v. Anwar Dar and others, reported as 1985 KLJ 477. Shri Babu Ram additionally submits that without framing any issue regarding jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the suit, learned Munsiff has transferred the case which, according to Shri Sharma, is a course, not recognized by law. Shri Babu Ram Sharma further submits that a suit for injunction is not cognizable by a Collector under the Agrarian Reforms Act and in that view of the matter, only Civil Courts can entertain a suit for injunction.
3. Shri J.A. Kazmi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, while supporting the order impugned in the Revision Petition, has relied on another Single Bench judgment of this Court reported as 1999 Srinagar Law Journal 524, titled Bua Ditta v. Ananti. I have considered both the judgments of this Court. Submissions of learned counsel for the parties too have been registered.
4. In order to deal with the submissions raised by learned counsel for the parties, it would be advantageous to refer to Section 19 of the J&K Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the Agrarian Act), which reads thus:
Section 19. Powers of Revenue Officers
(1) Unless the class of Revenue Officers, by whom any function is to be discharged or any power is to be exercised, is specified by or under this Act, the Government may, by notification, determine the functions to be discharged or the powers to be exercised under this Act by any class of Revenue Officers.
(2) The manner and procedure for the performance of duties, the exercise and conferment of powers, distribution of business and withdrawal and transfer of cases under this Act shall, save as otherwise provided by or under this Act, be regulated by the Jammu and Kashmir Land Revenue Act, Samvat 1996 and the rules made thereunder.
(3) The following applications, suits and proceedings shall be disposed of by a Collector:-
(a) proceedings under Section 56 of the Jammu and Kashmir Tenancy Act, Samvat 1980;
(b) proceedings under sub-section (2) of Section 68-A of the Jammu and Kashmir Tenancy Act, Samvat 1980;
(c) proceedings under Section 24 of the Jammu and Kashmir Big Landed Estates Abolition Act, Samvat 2007;
(d) application by an owner or an intermediary that the person, who claims to be cultivating the land as a tenant, is not a tenant but a trespasser;
(e) all other cases of dispute including those where the party in possession pleads adverse possession against the recorded owner/intermediary.
(4) Any application, suit or proceeding of the kind mentioned in sub-Section (3), pending at the commencement of this Act before a Revenue Officer subordinate to a Collector or any Civil or Revenue Court, shall be transferred to the Collector having jurisdiction in the place in which the land in dispute is situate.
(5) Any application, suit or proceeding relating to cases specified in clause (e) of sub-section (3) which, immediately before the commencement of the Jammu and Kashmir Agrarian Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1988 were pending before any Civil Court, shall, on such commencement, stand transferred to the Collector having jurisdiction over the area in which the land in dispute is situate, and the Collector shall in his capacity as the appellate or revisional authority, as the case may be, dispose of the same in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
5. Perusal of Section 19 (3) (e) of the Agrarian Act, demonstrates that all cases other than those contemplated by Sub-Section (3) Clauses
