Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a suit for ejectment and possession in respect of bhumidhari land, covered by Section 209 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1951, was cognizable by the civil court or lay exclusively before the special court named in the Act.
Analysis: The suit, on the findings recorded, was one for ejectment of a person occupying land without title and therefore fell within Section 209. Section 331 of the Act barred cognizance by any court other than the court specified in Schedule II for such a suit. Schedule II placed a suit of this nature before the Assistant Collector, First Class, as the court of original jurisdiction. Since the statute created a special forum and excluded the ordinary civil courts, the civil court that entertained the suit lacked inherent jurisdiction. A decree passed by a court without such jurisdiction could not stand, and the objection could be taken even at a later stage.
Conclusion: The civil court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit, and the dismissal of the plaintiffs' claim was upheld on that ground.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute confers exclusive jurisdiction on a special court for a class of suits and bars cognizance by ordinary civil courts, any suit instituted in the civil court for that relief is incompetent and the resulting decree is without jurisdiction.