S.D. Singh, J. - (1.) The following three questions have been referred to the Full Bench by our brother, Mithan Lal, J. (1) Whether in a suit instituted before the 28th May, 1956, that is prior to the enforcement of Act XVIII of 1956, and which was still pending on the date the said amendment came into force, the issue about sirdari right was or was not to be referred to the revenue court? (2) Whether the jurisdiction of the court for deciding sirdari issue is governed with reference to the date of the institution of suit or the date of decision? (3) Whether the jurisdiction of the court which decided the question of sirdari right and which jurisdiction had also been exercised by entertainment of the suit, could be taken away and the issue relating to sirdari right became referable to revenue court by amendment to Sec. 332-B in face.of the saving incorporated under Sec. 23(1) of Act XVIII of 1956?
(2.) The reference to Full Bench has been made in this second civil appeal 30 of 1959 and nine other connected appeal Nos. 65, 86, 185, 186, 255, 257, 418, 477 and 587 of 1959. All these appeals were heard together.
(3.) The points involved in the decision of the questions referred to the Full Bench relate to the interpretation of Section 332-B of the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, I of 1951, (to be referred to hereafter as the Act) and the amendments made in that section from time to time. A brief history of the legislation on the subject may be given before we come to the points under consideration.;