R. M. Sahai, J.

1. THESE two appeals although arise out of different orders are being disposed of by common judgment as the question of law raised in both of them is the same, namely whether suits were maintainable in Civil Court or Revenue Court.

2. IT has been found by the two Courts below that the sale deeds executed by respondents' mother, his natural guardian in favour of appellants were void and inoperative as respondent being a lunatic no sale-deed could be executed on his behalf even by the natural guardian without the permission of District Judge. On this finding and the pleading to same effect the question is whether courts below committed any error in deciding the issue on question of jurisdiction in affirmative.

Admittedly the land in dispute is Bhumidhari and is governed by provisions of UP ZA and LR Act I of 1951. The suits were not only for declaration, that the sale deeds were void but for possession as well. A document which is void can be avoided or ignored by a party. It is only a voidable document which needs adjudication by Civil Court. The controversy has been put beyond doubt by Supreme Court in Gorakh Nath v. H. N. Singh, AIR 1973 SC 1451. Under Sec.