( 1 ) ON 26-9-1946, Natha, respondent, claiming to be the hereditary tenant of a plot of land in village Udra Pachhlai, instituted a suit in the Court of the Munsif (Central) Hardoi for recovery of possession of the plot against Bhikham, appellant, who was said to be a trespasser. Bhikham claimed to be a sub-tenant and an issue was framed to determine this claim and was remitted to the Revenue Court for a finding.

( 2 ) WHILE the matter was still before the revenue Court, Section 180, U. P. Tenancy Act, was amended in such a way that suits even by tenants against treapassera became triable by revenue courts and consequently the jurisdiction of the civil Court became barred under Section 242, tenancy Act.

( 3 ) THE Revenue Court, therefore, returned the cage to the civil Court and the defendant applied to the civil Court pointing out the amendment of the law and praying that no further proceedings be taken by the civil Court, The civil Court overruled this plea and held that it had jurisdiction to dispose of the suit which had, at the time of its institution, been rightly instituted in the civil court according to the Full Bench decision in Ori Lal v. Ganeshi (1947 Oudh W