Code of Civil Procedure, 1908:
s. 9 – Jurisdiction of civil court – Whether barred – For trying suit in respect of agricultural land for relief to declare the gift deed void and to restrain respondent Nos. 1 to 5 from alienating the property – While the suit of plaintiff before Revenue Court for declaration of ‘Khatedari’ rights in respect of suit property was pending – Held: Claim of the plaintiff to ‘Khatedari’ rights was pending adjudication, by the Revenue Court which had exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate upon such claim in view of s. 207 r/w s. 256, s. 88 and Third Schedule of Tenancy Act – The plaintiff had no right to seek relief before the civil court without first getting his ‘Khatedari’ rights decreed by the Revenue Court – Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 – ss. 207, 256, 88 and Third Schedule. Appellant-plaintiff filed a suit for declaring gift deed in respect of suit property (an agricultural land) as void and for restraining the defendants (respondent Nos. 1 to 5) from alienating the suit property. Appellant had also filed suit before Revenue Court for declaration of his ‘Khatedari’ rights. Respondent Nos.
1 to 3 filed an application u/Or. VII r. 11 r/w s. 151 CPC contending that civil court had no jurisdiction to try the suit. Trial court dismissed the application. High Court allowed the Revision holding that the suit was barred by the provisions of Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955. Hence the present appeal.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. Section 207 read with Section 256 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act bars the jurisdiction of the civil courts in respect of suits and applications of the nature specified in the Third Schedule to the Tenancy Act. Sl. No. 5 in the Third Schedule read with Section 207 of the Tenancy Act stipulates that a suit for the declaration of a right provided in Section 88 would lie before a revenue court. In a suit where the relief sought for is the declaration of the right stipulated in Section 88, Sections 207 and
256 read with the Third Schedule bar the jurisdiction of civil courts and vest jurisdiction exclusively with a revenue court. [Paras 14 , 15][726-A-B; 727-A-B]
2. The civil court may decree the relief prayed (declaration of gift deed in respect of suit property void) only if it is first determined that the appellant is entitled to khatedari rights in the suit property. Under the provisions of the Tenancy Act, the jurisdiction to declare khatedari rights vests exclusively with the revenue courts. Only after such determination may the civil court proceed to decree the relief as prayed. The explanation to Section
207 clarifies that if the cause of action in respect of which relief is sought can be granted only by the revenue court, then it is immaterial that the relief asked from the civil court is greater than, or in addition to or not identical with the relief which the revenue court would have granted. In view of this matter, the civil court may not grant relief until the khatedari rights of the appellant have been decreed by a revenue court. [Para 18][728E-G]
3. Where the khatedari rights are yet to be decreed, a claimant must first approach the revenue courts. The relief to declare the gift deed void and to restrain respondents Nos. 1 to
5 from interfering with or alienating the property vesting in a civil court may be sought for in a suit by a claimant in whom khatedari rights have been decreed by a revenue court. [Para 19][728-G-H; 729-A]
4. A recorded khatedar stands on a different footing compared to a claimant seeking a decree of their khatedari rights. A claimant seeking a decree of khatedari rights is barred from filing a suit in the civil court prior to their khatedari right being decreed by a revenue court when the relief sought for by the civil court includes a determination of khatedari rights. [Para 21][730-C-D]
5. In the present case, the High Court has proceeded on the basis that the suit seeking a declaration of the gift deed relating to disputed agricultural land as void and restraining Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 from transfer or sale of the agricultural land before the civil court is squarely covered by the bar to the jurisdiction of the civil court under the provisions of the Tenancy Act. The claim of the appellant to khatedari rights is pending adjudication by a revenue court which has the exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate upon such a claim. The appellant has no right to seek relief before the civil court without first getting his khatedari rights decreed by the revenue court. [Para 22][730-D-F]
Bank of Baroda v. Moti Bhai (1985) 1 SCC 475 : [1985]
2 SCR 784; Shri Ram v. A D J (2001) 3 SCC 24 :
[2001] 1 SCR 984 – relied on.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.