This is a petition by one Subbaratnam Ayyar for revising and setting aside the order of the District Munsif of Karur, in I.A. No. 991 of 1956, in Original Suit No. 158 of 1955, transferring the suit filed by the petitioner for an injunction against the respondent Pattavarthi Moopan to the revenue Court under section 6-A of Act XIV of 1956, acting on a prima facie presumption that the respondent, who was originally cultivating the land, would be a “cultivating tenant”.

I have perused the record and heard learned counsel on both sides. Mr. K. S. Desikan, learned counsel for the petitioner, urged that the respondent was only a waramdar, akin to a mattu-varamdar, and would not be a “ cultivating tenant” , and that the lower Court erred in holding him to be a cultivating tenant. I cannot agree. The lower Court never held the respondent to be a cultivating tenant. It merely presumed from the evidence on record, that the respondent might turn out to be a cultivating tenant, and that is all that section 6-A requires for entitling or requiring a civil Court to transfer a suit to the revenue Court where the question whether the person claiming to be a cultivating tenant was really a c