Adarsh Kumar Goel, J. - The respondent-plaintiff filed suit for declaration alleging that the orders of Assistant Collector and Collector declaring the defendant to be occupancy tenant were void. The defendant contested the suit.

2. The trial Court dismissed the suit holding that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to go into the matter. The lower Appellate Court remanded the matter after reversing the finding of the trial Court on the issue of jurisdiction holding that bar to the jurisdiction of Civil Court was only to the extent of grant of a declaration of a person being occupancy tenant under Section 77(3)(d) of the Punjab Tenancy Act and declaration granted by the Revenue Court was open to question before the Civil Court on well known grounds of such order being ultra vires. The Appellate Court set aside the decree of the trial Court and decreed the suit.

3. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the view taken by the lower Appellate Court was erroneous and even if the Civil Court had the jurisdiction, the trial Court had not recorded any finding on merits and even the lower Appellate Court had not recorded any finding on merits. Reliance is placed on a judgment of thus