- (1.) THIS is a second appeal against the decision of the Commissioner Udaipur dated 5. 8. 53.
(2.) THE circumstances which have given rise to this second appeal are that the appeal ants filed a suit on 23. 12. 50 in the court of Munsif Gangapur under sec. 9 of the Specific Relief Act for recovery of possession of 16 fields numbering 39, 40, 41 to 45, 50 to 55, 48, 49 and 24 bighas 5 biswas, in village Atolia Tehsil Karer. THE case was pending in the Munsif's court when the Rajasthan Revenue Courts (Procedure and Juris-diciton) Act came into force and therefore the Munsif transferred it on 20. 2. 51 to the Sub-Divisional Officer Bhilwara under sec. 6 (3) of the Act. THE suit was decreed. THE respondent went in first appeal to the Additional Commissioner. He set aside the decision on the ground that suit under sec. 8 of the Specific Relief Act was within the exclusive jurisdiction of a civil court and a revenue court could not try it. He remanded the case to the Sub-Divisional Officer with the direction that he should return the case to the Munsif and it was not accepted by him that he should make a reference to the High Court. The counsel for the parties was heard. The only point to be decided is whether the suit is triable by a civil court or a revenue court. Sec. 6 (3), 7 (1) 7 (2) of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts (Procedure and Jurisdiction) Act provides as follows: - "6 (3) - Any suit, application case or proceeding, pending before a civil court when this Act comes into force, which has been declared by sec. 7 to be exclusively triable by a revenue court, shall be transferred by such civil court to the revenue court competent under sec. 72 to deal with and dispose of the same. 7 (1) - All suits and applications of the nature specified in the first and second schedule shall be heard and determined by a revenue court. Sec. 7 (2) - No court other than a revenue court shall take cognizance of any such suit or application based on a cause of action in respect of which any relief could be contained by means of any such suit or application". and clause 12 of Group B of Schedule 1 of the same Act provides for a suit for recovery of possession by a person who has been wrongfully ejected. The land in dispute is admittedly no agricultural land. Now, reading the plaint, we find that the plaintiffs have stated therein that they have purchased it and that they are the owners of it and that the defendants have by force taken possession of it. Thus the condition mentioned in clause 12 above are fulfilled and the suit is perfectly covered by it. Under sec. 7 of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts (Procedure and Jurisdiction) Act therefore it is exclusively triable by a revenue court. The plaintiff filed the suit in the court of the Munsif Gangapur under sec. 9 of the Specific Relief Act, as paragraph 4 of the plaint shows, 00 23. 12. 50 when the Rajasthan Revenue Courts (Procedure and Jurisdiction) Act had not come into force. On the coming into force of this Act on 23rd January, 1951 it became, as shown above, exclusively triable by a revenue court under sec. 7 read with clause 12 of Group B of the first Schedule. The Munsif was therefore required under sec. 6 (3) to transfer it to the Sub-Divisional Officer and he did so rightly. The view taken by the Additional Commissioner is not correct. The suit is exclusively triable by a revenue court. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Additional Commissioner and remand the case to him with the directions that the first appeal shall be readmitted on its original cumber and disposed of according to law. .;