- (1.) THIS is an application in revision against an order rejecting an application that the Magistrate trying a case pending before him had no jurisdiction to try it.
(2.) THE dispute relates to certain agricultural plots, which according to the applicants are part of village Angraura in the district of Sitapur and according to the complainants opposite-parties are part of village Bhonri Kaundor situated in district Bahraich. These two districts of Sitapur and bahruich are divided by river Ghogra, which often changes its course. The dispute was about possession over these plots and the complaint was filed in the Court of Sub-Divisional Officer of qaisergunj, district Bahraich. The applicants' case was that the Sub-Divisional Officer of qaisergunj had no jurisdiction to try the case because the plots in dispute were situated on the other side of the river Ghogra, the side on which the district of Sitapur was situated.
(3.) IN the Revenue Manual (Volume II) paragraph 1631, the limits of the two districts are thus specified : "the deep stream of the following rivers is for purposes of criminal jurisdiction the boundary between the districts noted in Columns 2 and 3. " The river mentioned is Ghogra and the districts mentioned are Bahraich and Bara-Banki and bahraich and Sitapur. The question is what is the meaning of this paragraph. Does it mean the stream of the river Ghogra as it existed when the notification was issued or the deep stream as it exists at a particular moment when a dispute is raised? The matter is not free from difficulty. In one case decided by the Calcutta High Court on a similar notification the view was taken that the language means the deep stream as it existed at the date of the notification. This case is reported in Punardeo Narain Singh v. Ram Sarup Roy, 25 Cal. 858. The notification was "that the deep stream of the Ghogra is the boundary between the Balia District in the north-Western Provinces and the Sarun District in Bengal, up to the point where the boundary line between mouzah Ibrahimabad Nanhara in Balia, and mouzah Shitab Diara in Bengal, meets that river. " maclean C. J. observed : "i think the 'deep stream' spoken of in the notification of December 1888 must be the deep stream as it then existed, that is ten years ago. It is a matter of notoriety that the channels of indian rivers change very materially, and often in a very short time. What was the deep stream in 1888 may not be the deep stream of 1897, and it is consequently difficult for us to say what really is the deep stream which forms the boundary between the two districts. " Banerjee J. was not so definite. He stated : "it is at any rate open to doubt whether the notification of 5-12-1888, referred to above should bear the construction sought to put upon it by the learned Vakil for the petitioner, namely, that the deep stream of the Ghogra, the position of which may shift from time to time, is the boundary between Balia and Sarun. The notification may well be understood to mean that the boundary between Balia and Sarun would be the deep stream as it existed at the date of the notification, and that this would continue to be the boundary until the Government thought fit to alter it by a further notification. ";