IMPORTANT POINT
Agrarian disputes must be adjudicated by competent authorities.

J.P. Singh, J.—The petitioner Karnail Singh and respondent No.4 Mst. Savitri are in litigation for the last more than 35 years over land measuring 8 kanals comprised in Khasra No.331 min situated in Village Panjore of Tehsil, Jammu. The facts leading to the litigation may be stated thus: One Jagan Nath son of Pt. Phangi Ram of village Panjore needed Rs.1,000 (Rupees One thousand) to pay the Arrears of Land Revenue of his land. Therefore receiving Rs.1,000 as advance from Inder Singh son of Kirpa Ram and Karnail Singh son of Budhi Singh, he delivered the possession of his land measuring 40 kanals and 8 marlas comprised in Khewat No.1 Khata No.75 Khasra No.331, Khewat No.3 khata No.55 khasraNo.341, and Khewat No.10 khata No.86 khasra No.343 min situated at village Panjore, to them on Mustajri for a period of 20 years executing an agreement titled Mustajri ama on 9 Sawan, 2010 which was registered with Sub-Registrar, Jammu on 12th of Sawan, 2010. The Endorsement of registration on the Agreement 2 records Jagan Nath to have admitted receipt of Rs.500 before the execution of the Agreement whereas Rs.500 is stated paid to him in presence of the Sub-Registrar. The terms and conditions as recorded in Mustajri_ama are as follows:

(i) 20 years period of Mustajri would commence from the beginning of Kharif Crop 2010.

(ii) During the period of Mustajri, the beneficiaries in possession of the land would pay Land Revenue and water tax to the Government and deliver Receipts obtained thereof to the owner.

(iii) The beneficiaries would be entitled to appropriate entire income of the land during the currency of Mustajri.

(iv) The owner shall alone be responsible in case he looses his right to possess the land.

(v) The owner shall not be entitled to dispossess the beneficiaries from the land during the period of Mustajri.

(vi) After the period of Mustajri, the entire Mustajri amount of Rs.1,000 shall be deemed to have extinguished entitling the owner to the possession of land without payment of any amount.

(vii) After the Mustajri period, the beneficiaries would not be entitled to claim any sort of compensation from the owner.

(viii) The beneficiaries shall not be entitled to give the land on Contract or give possession thereof to any stranger.

(ix) The beneficiaries shall not be entitled to use the land for any other purpose except cultivation.

(x) The trees existing at present and grown in future on the land shall be the property of the owner but the beneficiaries may prune the trees and enjoy their usufruct.

(xi) If the beneficiaries had built any house in the land for their residence they shall have the right to lift the material after the expiry of the Mustajri period. In case the material was not so lifted within three months, the material would stand forfeited in favour of the owner.

The owner of the land appears to have sold part of the land to respondent No.4 vide Sale Deed dated 12.10.1964 registered on 12.10.1964. She, therefore, acquired all those rights in the land purchased by her that Jagan Nath possessed therein.

The period indicated in Mustajri ama for the beneficiaries to retain possession of the land expired in the year 1973. The petitioner and the legal representatives of Inder Singh, who died meanwhile, did not, however, hand over the possession of the land to the owners. The dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.4 pertains only to 8 kanals of land because there appears to have been some compromise between the owners and those in possession of rest of the land.

Respondent No.4 filed a Suit in the Court of City Judge, Jammu seeking possession of 8 kanals of land which was in possession of the petitioner. The petitioner contested her Suit questioning the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts to entertain it which was stated hit by the provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Agrarian Reforms Act.

Taking the view that the relationship between the parties was that of a landlord and tenant and the Agreement betw