- (1.) HEARD Sri Rajesh Chandola and Sri Sarvesh Agrawal, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri J. C. Belwal, learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) BY means of this revision, under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Proce dure, 1908, the revisionist has chal lenged the finding on issue no. 3, passed by the trial court in Civil Suit No. 48 of 2002. Brief facts of the case are that plaintiffs (present respondents), filed Suit No. 48 of 2002, before Civil Judge (Jun ior Division), Kashipur, District Udhamsingh Nagar, with the pleading that by virtue of adverse possession over agricultural land, Khasra No. Ill, meas uring area 2. 49 acres, within the limits of village Jaspur, Patti Mansha, Tehsil Kashipur, belongs to them. On the ba sis of the above averments, the plaintiffs filed suit for injunction against Nagar Palika Parishad (defendant), before the trial court. A preliminary objection ap pears to have been raised in the written statement as to the jurisdiction of the Civil Court in the matter, which was for mulated as issue no. 3. The trial court after hearing the parties decided issue no. 3 in negative holding that it has ju risdiction. Learned counsel for the revision ist argued that, admittedly, the land in question is an agricultural land and plaintiffs are not recorded tenure hold ers. This fact is not denied by the plain tiffs / respondents that they are not re corded tenure holders. That being so it is a clear case of declaration of tile under the garb of injunction, for which Civil Court has no jurisdiction to try the suit. The finding recorded by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kashipur, on issue no. 3, in the Suit No. 48 of 2002, that it has jurisdiction, is against the law, as such, liable to be set aside.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the plaintiffs argued that the case of Nagar Palika that land belongs to it, based on a forged document, as Patti Mansha was never transferred to Nagar Palika Parishad. The said document can be ap preciated by the competent court, where the suit is cognizable. With these observations, this revision is allowed. Findings recorded by the trial court on issue no. 3 is set aside. Issue no. 3 shall stand decided against the plaintiffs. The trial court shall return the plaint to the plaintiffs for presenta tion before the court. .;