Samarendra Nath Bhattacharjee, J. - (1.) In the Second Appeal, the only substantial question of law that awaits my decision is whether both the learned Courts below acted illegally in passing the judgment impugned without compliance with the requirement under the provision of Section 21(2) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, by not referring the disputes before the statutory authority appointed under Section 18 of the said Act.
(2.) The appellants herein filed a Title Suit No. 5 of 1973 against the respondents for declaration of title in the suit property and for permanent injunction against the respondents. The respondents took the pica of bringing possession as bargadars under the plaintiff. The learned trial Judge framed as many as nine issues out of which issue No. 6 was as follows (a) Are the defendants bargadars under the plaintiff in respect of the suit lands as alleged
(3.) The learned trial Judge negatived the issue No. 6 on the basis of the oral and documentary evidences and found that defendants are not the bargadars. The suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiff. The learned 1st Appellate Court held, ' having regard to the facts and circumstances and the evidences on record, 1 am convinced that the appellants/defendants are not and never were bargadars in respect of the suit land and that the plaintiff was in khas possession of the same in 1379 B. S. and on the date of the suit as well." On such finding, the learned 1st Appellate Court affirmed the decision of the learned trial Judge. Against the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Judge dated 19.3.76, the plaintiff has preferred the second appeal.;