S.D. Singh, J. - (1.) This is an application in revision against an order passed by Sri R. B. Lal, Munsif, West Hardoi, remitting certain issues to the Revenue Court for a finding under section 332-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. The five issues, though the Munsif refers to them as only four which have been referred by him to the Revenue Court are:- "(1) Whether the plaintiff was a hereditary tenant of the plots in suit up to 30-6-1952. If so, is he a sirdar now ? (2) Whether the plaintiff was an adhivasi of the plots in suit upto 30th October, 1954 ? (a) If so, is he a sirdar ? (4) Whether defendants 4 and 5 are sirdars of the plots in suit as alleged ? (5) Whether defendants 4 and 6 are co-sirdars of the plots in suit along with the plaintiff? If so, its effect ?
(2.) The Munsif refers to Ch. Raghuraj Narain v. Judicial Officer Ghaziabad, 1959 RD 291 : 1959 ALJ 681 as an authority for the issues being referred to the Revenue Court. It appears that the Munsif referred to this ruling without having a look at it inasmuch as the ruling is an authority for the issues not being referred to the Revenue Court. All the same the question for decision in this revision is whether in view of the changes made in the law under U.P. Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, XVIII of 1956, and the U.P. Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, XXXVII of 1958, the aforesaid issues have to be heard and decided by the Munsif itself or submitted to the revenue Court under Sec. 332-B of the aforesaid Act.
(3.) Sec. 332-B as it stood prior to the amendment made by the U.P. Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, XVIII of 1956, did not refer to sirdari rights and questions relating to those rights were, therefore, heard and decided by Civil Courts. Under this amending Act, by substituting the words "a sirdar, adhivasi or assami" for the words "an adhivasi or assami" in Sec. 332-B of Act I of 1951, the procedure for the determination of questions relating to sirdari rights was changed, and issues relating to such rights were also, therefore, required to be submitted to the revenue Court for a finding. The question whether the amended section applied to suits which were filed before the Amending Act, XVIII of 1956, came into force, or whether it applied only to suits instituted after its amendment, came to be considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Ram Chandra v. Muneshwar, 1961 ALJ 991 and it has been held that the amendment made in Sec. 332-B of Act I of 1951 is retrospective in effect, and that if a question of sirdari, rights was raised even in a suit filed, before the commencement of Amending Act, the issue in respect of it has to be referred to the revenue Court for a decision. The earlier case Ch. Raghuraj Narain v. Judicial Officer, 1959 RD 291 : 1959 ALJ 681 and also an earlier unreported decision in Ram Lochan Singh v. Lakshmi Shanker, C.R. No. 1492 of 1956 D/d. 6.1.1958 , were specifically overruled. If the law had stood as it was after this amendment in 1956, the Munsif would have been right in referring the issues to the Revenue Court for a finding.;