D. S. Sinha. J. - (1.) HEARD Sri R. R. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri I. N. Singh learned counsel representing the contesting respondents, at length and in detail.
(2.) THE plaint of Civil Suit no. 348 of 1973, instituted in the court of Munsif Gyanpur. was directed to be returned by the learned Munsif vide his order and judgment dated 17th October, 1984 on the ground that the civil court did not have jurisdiction to try the suit which was a suit for injunction in respect of an agricultural land and cognizable by revenue court. The order and judgment of the learned Munsif was appealed against and the appellate court upheld the same. The matter was then agitated before this court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition no. 15223 of 1981, Ram Autar and others v. Civil Judge, Gyanpur, Varanasi and others. At the time of hearing of the said writ petition, the learned counsel appearing for the parties agreed that the provisions of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. 1950, reliance whereupon was placed by the courts below, did not apply. The learned counsel conceded that the matter would be governed by the provisions of the Banaras State Tenancy Act (Act no. Ill of 1949), hereinafter called the Act. Since the courts below had not examined the question of maintenance of the suit in the civil court In the light of the provisions of the Act, this court, while quashing the appellate order, remitted the matter to the appellate court for a fresh decision. The appellate court has, after examining the matter at length, found that the suit is not cognizable by the civil court, and by means of its order and judgment dated 17th October. 1984 confirmed the order of the trial court directing return of the plaint. Hence this petition.
(3.) IT is not disputed that the provisions of the Act are applicable and the question with regard to the jurisdiction of the civil court to entertain the suit of the petitioners has to be examined in the light of the provisions of the said Act. Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. hereinafter called the Code, envisages that the civil counts shall have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred. One It is demonstrated that its jurisdiction to take cognizance of any category of suits is either expressly or impliedly outsted the civil courts will loose competence to try a suit falling that category. What this court has, therefore, to see as to whether there is any such exclusion of the jurisdiction of the civil courts in respect of the suit instituted by the petitioners.;