S.N. Katju, J. - (1.) THESE are five connected appeals arising out of five suits for possession of the land in suit, demolition of the constructions standing thereon and for damages.
(2.) THE suits were instituted in the civil court. One of the contentions raised by the Defendants was that the civil court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suits. The trial court dismissed the suits. But on appeal the court below expressed the view that the civil court had no jurisdiction to try the suits and the plaints, in the suits were ordered to be returned to the Plaintiffs for presentation to the proper court. The question whether in such cases the revenue court or the civil court had jurisdiction to entertain the suits has not been free from difficulty. Under Section 230 of UP Act III of 1926 only those suits came within the purview of the section in which "adequate relief could be obtained" from the revenue court. Subsequently the word "adequate" was deleted from the section and also from the explanation to the section. Again, the word "any" was added before the word "relief" in the section by Section 22 of the UP Tenancy (Amendment) Act No. X of 1947. Therefore, as the section stood the civil court could not take cognizance of any suit or application based on a cause of action in respect of which any relief could be obtained by means of any such suit or application.
(3.) THE matter was considered in Syed Mohd. Zahir Hasan v. Dulare (l) (1953 AWR 414). Recently the question again came up for consideration in First Appeal From Order No. 378 of 1958: (Ram Tarak v. Ram Samujh) (2) decided by a Division Bench of this Court on 23.7.1963 and in Baiju v. Shambhu Saran (3) (1963 AWR 781). In the aforesaid case it was observed: The essential question that arises upon the provisions of Section 242 (of UP Tenancy Act, 1139) is whether the Plaintiff had any cause of action on which he could obtain any relief from a revenue court (if he had, he cannot approach a civil court), and not whether on the particular cause of action selected by him he could get any relief from a revenue court.;