- (1.) THIS is a reference by the Assis-tant Collector, Mandalgarh, apparently under sec. 40 1) of he Rajasthan Revenue Courts (Procedure and Jurisdiction) Act (No. I of 1951) (hereinafter referred to as the Revenue Courts Act) and has arisen under the following circumstances.
(2.) THE fact of the case out of which this reference has arisen may be stated very shortly for our present purposes. THE plaintiff Dhula who claims to be the proprietor of the suit well and the land appurtenant thereto alleges to have let it out to one Rambux. His case further was that defendant Nathusingh had forcibly turned out Rambux from the land in question and put defendant Harlal in possession thereof. Dhula, therefore, filed this suit for possession in the court of the Munsiff, Mandalgarh, on the 15th April, 1948 THE Revenue Courts Act having come into force on the 31st January, 1951, the Munsiff, under sec. 6 (3) thereof, transferred it to the Assistant Collector, Mandalgarh. It was urged before the Assistant Collector that out of the issues framed by the Munsiff one was the following and that it related to title and, therefore, the civil courts alone could decide it. Issue: D;k Dqok tehu ihoy 4 ,Dm 10 ch?kk eqnbz Dh feyfD;r Dk gs vksj jkecDl tkv Dks Dk'r Ds fy;s lksaik \ The Assistant Collector has maDe the present reference in which he says that he is not able to DeciDe whether he has the jurisDiction to DeciDe the above issue or that it shoulD be DeciDe by a civil court anD his, therefore, maDe the present reference. I may point out at once that this reference is entirely misconceived. Sec. 40 of the Revenue Courts Act enables a civil or a revenue court to make a reference to this Court where such court is in doubt where it is competent to entertain any suit, case, proceeding, application or appeal or not, and not where, as in this case it is unable to decide for itself whether it should decide a particular issue or send it for decision to the civil court. The Assistant Collector has nowhere said that he had any doubt as to the question of jurisdiction relating to the suit it which this reference has arisen and, therefore, sec. 40 does not come into application at all. I may add further that it is not the business of this Court to give advice as to matters which a subordinate court should decide for itself. That court must consider the law applicable to the question before it and then come to a proper decision. Incidentally, however, I may draw the attention of the Assistant Collector to sec. 36 of the Revenue Courts Act, which would appear to have a bearing on the question before him and if any party is aggrieved by such decision, as he may arrive at in the light of that section, it will be for that party concerned to challenge the decision in appropriate courts. With these remarks, this reference is hereby rejected There will be no order as to costs in this Court, .;