- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
(3.) The suit of the appellant filed in the civil court has been held to be debarred on account of Section 36-A of the Bombay Prevention of fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the High Court did not consider (he provisions contained in Section 36-B of the said Act which is reproduced below: "36-B.suits involving issues required to be decided under this Act. (1) If any suit instituted in any civil court or Mamlatdar's Court involves any issues which are required to be settled, decided or dealt with by any authority competent to settle, decide or deal with such issues under this Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'competent authority') the civil court or mamlatdar's Court shall stay the suit and refer such issues to such competent authority for determination. (2) On receipt of such reference from the civil court or Mamlatdar's court, the competent authority shall deal with and decide such issues in accordance with the provisions of this Act and shall communicate its decision to the civil court or Mamlatdar's Court and such court shall thereupon dispose of the suit in accordance with the procedure applicable thereto. ";