The Chief Justice.-

The question in this appeal is whether the Civil Court or the Revenue Court has jurisdiction to decide the questions raised in the plaint.

The properties in suit originally formed part of the Tanjore Palace Estate. In Original Suit No. 3 of 1919 of the District Court of West Tanjore the lands with other properties were allotted to one Vasudeva Sahib, a member of the family. The suit took the form of an interpleader action, but it was in effect a suit for partition. There was an appeal to this Court from the decree of the trial Court. The judgment of this Court was delivered on. the 24th January, 1924. It was to the effect that Vasudeva Sahib had received more than his proper share in the estate. Consequently the Court modified the decree of the District Court. Restitution proceedings followed and resulted in the sale of the properties in suit to the first defendant on the 23rd December, 1938.

It is the plaintiffs’ case that the properties with which the present action is concerned were leased to them or their predecessors in title by Vasudeva Sahib in 1925. They comprise 429 41 acres and according to the plaintiffs they form part of an inam village. This allegation is denied by the defendants. On the 12th March, 1928, Vasudeva Sahib sold the lands to one RM. P.R. M.M. Subra-maniam Chettiar, plaintiffs 2 to 5 and the predecessors in title of plaintiffs 1and 2 attorned to Subramaniam Chettiar, who on the 3rd June, 1929, granted them a lease for three years. On the 29th August, 1932, he renewed the lease for seven years.

In insolvency proceedings instituted in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Tanjore in 1930, Vasudeva Sahib was adjudicated insolvent. On the 25th January, 1937, the Insolvency Court, on the application filed by the Official Receiver set aside the sale to Subramaniam Chettiar on the ground that it constituted a fraud on the creditors. The decision was confirmed by this Court on the 27th November, 1940. While the appeal was pending the plaintiffs filed a suit in the Revenue Court (Summary Suit No. 47 of 1938) for an order directing Subramaniam Chettiar to tender them a patta. This suit proceeded ex parte and resulted in a decree being passed in the plaintiffs’ favour on the 24th September, 1938.

On his purchase of the properties in suit the first defendant sought to gain possession, but he was resisted by the plaintiffs who on the 2nd August, 1939, filed in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Kumbakonam the present suit. They asked for a declaration that they are entitled to continue in possession of the lands, having obtained rights of permanent occupancy as the result of he passing of the Madras Estates Land (Third Amendment) Act, 1956. They prayed for consequential relief in the form of a permanent injunction restraining the first defendant from interfering with their possession and enjoyment of the properties. The first defendant pleaded inter alia that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction in the matter. The Subordinate Judge accepted this plea. He then went into the merits of the case and here also found against the plaintiffs. Accordingly he dismissed the suit with costs.

The plaintiffs appealed to the District Judge of West Tanjore. The District Judge agreed with the Subordinate Judge that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction, but he refrained from entering into a discussion of the merits. He directed the plaint to be returned for presentation to the proper Court. The appeal is from this order of the District Judge. In the first instance it came before Chardrasekhara Aiyar, J.,who referred it to a Bench for decision as he considered that the judgments of this Court in Appa Rao v. Gurraju1 and Raja Rajeswara Sethupathi v. Muthudayan2 had bearing on the question of jurisdiction and were in conflict. On the 20th November, 1946, the appeal came up for hearing before a Division Bench consisting of patanjali Sastri and Bell, JJ., who referred it to a Full Bench.

In our opinion it is quite unnecessa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document