- (1.)THIS is a reference by the Civil Judge, Alwar under sec. 243 (2) of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act requesting that a suit pending in the court of the Civil Judge, Alwar should be held to be one triable exclusively by a revenue court and should be transferred to a revenue court.
(2.)THE relevant facts are as follows: THE plaintiffs Bodan and others filed a suit against the defendants Mst. Ghinsi and others for the partition of agricultural land in the court of the Sub divisional Officer, Rajgarh on 1st of August, 1955. On the promulgation of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, the Sub-divisional Officer, Rajgarh found that the suit could not be tried by a revenue court and, therefore, transferred the case to the court of the Civil Judge, Alwar. Before the Civil Judge, after some trial, the defendant raised an objection that the suit was not triable by a civil court. An issue was framed and the learned Judge, after hearing both the sides, came to the conclusion that it was the function of the revenue courts to deal with matters of partition of estates. Sec. 184 and the subsequent sections of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956, provide the procedure to be adopted by the revenue courts in cases of partition of estates. Under these provisions, the proceeding for partition have to be initiated by means of an application to the Collector and further steps for partition of the estates have to be taken by him, although on an application, and not by a suit as in the present case. Of course under sec. 193 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956, it is open to the Collector to require any party to institute a suit in cases where the case involves a question of proprietary title, which has not been already determined by a court of competent jurisdiction. But it does not follow from this that a party is free to file a suit for partition directly in a civil court. THE right to file a suit in the civil court accrues to a party only when the Collector issues a direction requiring a party to file a civil suit. It also appears from the order of the Civil Judge that he gave an opportunity to the plaintiffs to amend their suit, so as to convert it into a suit for declaration of title, but the plaintiffs did not avail of that opportunity. In these circumstances, I have no doubt that the Civil Judge had no alternative but to hold that the suit was not triable by him and that the contest had to be initiated and decided in a revenue court. No body has appeared in this Court either to support or oppose the reference.
On a consideration of all the circumstances of the case, I feel inclined to accept this reference. The reference is accordingly accepted. The Civil Judge is directed to transfer the case to a competent revenue court. The revenue court may in the exercise of its discretion regularise the proceedings by treating the suit as an application for partition and dispose of the case on merits or otherwise dispose it of in accordance with law. .

;