( 1 ) THIS second appeal arises out of a suit for the cancellation of a deed of lease. The plaintiffs-respondents alleged that they were the chief tenants of certain agricultural plots and a sub-lease of those plots had been obtained by the defendants-appellant from them by fraud. They, therefore, brought this suit for the cancellation of the sub-lease. Both the lower Courts have held that the fraud alleged by the respondents has been proved and, therefore, the sub-lease is liable to be cancelled. The trial Court consequently decreed the suit and the lower appellate court dismissed the defendants appeal against that decree. In this second appeal the only question of law, that has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellant, is that the civil courts had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit because some relief in respect of the cause of action alleged by the respondents could have been granted by the revenue Court to them under section 60, U. P. Tenancy Act.

( 2 ) SECTION 60, U. P. Tenancy Act, gives the land-holder a right to bring a suit against any person claiming to be a tenant of a holding for a declaration of right of such person. The contention of the learned counsel

Click Here to Read the rest of this document