Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Saiyyed Wase Ahmed, challenged the order of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Nawapur, dated 12th January 2018, which refused to refer Issue No.1 to the Tenancy Court. The respondents (original plaintiffs) had filed R.C.S. No.19 of 2007 seeking a permanent injunction against the petitioner, claiming possession of certain lands as tenants through their predecessor Bhengya Karma. The petitioner filed a written statement denying the allegations. On 3rd September 2010, the trial court framed issues, including Issue No.1: whether the plaintiffs prove that the suit property is their ancestral property and they are in possession as tenants. On 12th January 2018, the petitioner filed an application under Section 85A of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, arguing that the Civil Court lacked jurisdiction to decide the tenancy issue. The trial court rejected the application, holding that the issue was not exclusively a tenancy issue. The High Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the trial court's order and directing it to refer Issue No.1 to the Tenancy Court. The court held that the issue of tenancy must be decided by the Tenancy Court, and the Civil Court cannot proceed until the Tenancy Court decides the issue.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Jurisdiction - Tenancy Dispute - Reference to Tenancy Court - The Civil Court lacks jurisdiction to decide issues of tenancy; such issues must be referred to the Tenancy Court under Section 85A of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. The trial court erred in refusing to refer Issue No.1 to the Tenancy Court, as the issue pertained to the tenancy rights of the plaintiffs' predecessor. (Paras 9-11)
B) Tenancy Law - Jurisdiction - Section 85A - Mandatory Reference - Section 85A of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 mandates that if a civil court is satisfied that an issue involves a question of tenancy, it must refer it to the Tenancy Court. The court held that the trial court's refusal to refer was illegal and set aside the order. (Paras 9-11)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Civil Court has jurisdiction to decide the issue of tenancy or whether it should be referred to the Tenancy Court under the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the order dated 12th January 2018 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Nawapur, and directed the trial court to refer Issue No.1 to the Tenancy Court for decision. The trial court was directed to await the decision of the Tenancy Court before proceeding further.
Law Points
- Jurisdiction of Civil Court
- Tenancy dispute
- Reference to Tenancy Court
- Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act
- 1948
- Section 85
- Section 85A
- Section 125(3) of Transfer of Property Act
- 1882
Case Details
2021 LawText (BOM) (08) 3
Writ Petition No.3509 of 2020
Shri S.R. Sapkal h/f. Shri V.D. Sapkal for Petitioner; Shri Gajendra Devichand Jain for Respondents
Saiyyed Wase Ahmed s/o. Barkat Ahmed
Shegji Bhengya Padvi (died through L.Rs.) and others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the order of the Civil Judge refusing to refer an issue of tenancy to the Tenancy Court.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought setting aside of the trial court's order dated 12th January 2018 and direction to refer Issue No.1 to the Tenancy Court.
Filing Reason
The trial court refused to refer Issue No.1 (whether plaintiffs are tenants) to the Tenancy Court, despite the petitioner's application under Section 85A of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948.
Previous Decisions
The trial court framed issues on 3rd September 2010. On 12th January 2018, the trial court rejected the petitioner's application for reference to the Tenancy Court.
Issues
Whether the Civil Court has jurisdiction to decide the issue of tenancy or whether it should be referred to the Tenancy Court under the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that Issue No.1 pertains to tenancy and must be referred to the Tenancy Court under Section 85A of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948.
Respondents argued that the issue is not exclusively a tenancy issue and the Civil Court has jurisdiction.
Ratio Decidendi
Under Section 85A of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, if a civil court is satisfied that an issue involves a question of tenancy, it must refer it to the Tenancy Court. The Civil Court lacks jurisdiction to decide such issues. The trial court's refusal to refer Issue No.1 was illegal and set aside.
Judgment Excerpts
9. In the present case, Issue No.1 is as to whether the plaintiffs prove that the suit property is their ancestral property and they are in possession as tenants. This issue clearly involves the question of tenancy. Therefore, the learned Civil Judge ought to have referred this issue to the Tenancy Court.
10. The learned Civil Judge has committed an error in holding that the issue is not exclusively a tenancy issue. The issue clearly involves the question of tenancy and therefore, the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to decide it.
11. Hence, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 12th January 2018 is set aside. The learned Civil Judge is directed to refer Issue No.1 to the Tenancy Court for decision. The trial court shall await the decision of the Tenancy Court before proceeding further.
Procedural History
Respondents filed R.C.S. No.19 of 2007 in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Nawapur, for permanent injunction. Issues were framed on 3rd September 2010. On 12th January 2018, the petitioner filed an application for referring Issue No.1 to the Tenancy Court, which was rejected by the trial court. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition in the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948: 85, 85A
- Transfer of Property Act, 1882: 125(3)
