SHIV DAYAL, C. J.:- A Division Bench has referred this case to us to 'resolve the controversy' between Paitram v. Board of Revenue (1968 Jab LJ 304) and Gangaram v. Kanhaiyalal (197l Jab LJ 819). Those cases were decided by two different Division Benches in both of them the question was what the Tahsildar can do and how he should proceed with an application for partition made before it under Section 178 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) when any question of title is raised. Section l78 of the Code reads as follows:-

"Section 178 Partition of holding:- (1) if in any holding which has been assessed for the purpose of agriculture under Section 59, there are more than one Bhumiswami, any such Bhumiswami may apply to a Tahsildar for a partition of his share in the holding :

Provided that no such partition shall be made, if any question of title is raised, until such question has been decided by a civil suit.

(2) The Tahsildar may, after hearing the co-tenure holders divide the holding and apportion the assessment of the holding in accordance with the rules made under this Code.

Explanation I.- For purpose of this section any co-s