- (1.) The respondents filed a suit for possession of land detailed in the plaint against Gram Panchayat Nagar Sabha, Dhur, Tehsil Samana, District Patiala (petitioner) on the basis of title. The petitioner contested the suit. The trial court framed the issues, including issues No. 7 and 8 which read :- "7. Whether the suit land is shamlat deh, and vests in the Panchayat ? 8. Whether this court has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit ?". The trial court vide order dated 10th October, 1977, held that the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit. The respondents filed an appeal against the order of the trial court dated 10th October, 1977, which was accepted by the learned District Judge, Patiala, vide order dated 7th May, 1980. The operative part of the order of the learned District Judge reads:- "2. The suit was instituted in the year 1971. Our High Court in Gram Panchayat v. Balwant Kaur,1979 RLR 96, had observed that the suits which have been instituted before the amendment in the Punjab Village Common Lands Act have to be decided by the Civil Court. As such, the trial court went wrong in rejecting the plaint. I accept the appeal and remand the suit to the trial court with a direction to proceed further in accordance with law. The parties have been directed to appear in the trial court on 14.5.1980...."
(2.) The decision in Gram Panchayat and another v. Balwant Kaur and another,1979 RLR 96, was over-ruled by a Division Bench of this court in Gram Sabha Balad Kalan and another v. Sarwan Singh and others,1981 PunLJ 311. It was held by the Division Bench: "The word "adjudicate" according to the Webster's Dictionary, means to settle judicially and according to Oxford Dictionary, to try and determine judicially. According to Black's Law Dictionary, to adjudicate means to settle in the exercise of judicial authority or to decide judicially. It is, therefore, evident that on the enactment of the said Section 13, Civil Court has been debarred from not only entertaining the suit but also from passing any judgment upon any question whether land is or is not Shamlat Deh. The conclusion is, therefore, irresistible that the Civil Court ceases to have jurisdiction to pass any judgment even in a pending suit on the said question".
(3.) The petitioner approached the trial Court for deciding issues No. 7 and 8 afresh in the light of the decision in Gram Sabha Balad Kalan and another's case . The trial Court vide order dated 17th January, 1982, held that the decision of the District Judge under issues No. 7 and 8 had attained finality and the application for redeciding the same was hit by the principle of res judicata. The petitioner has assailed the order of the trial court dated 17th January, 1982 in the present revision.;