- (1.) THIS is a reference by the learned Munsif, Sikar, dated 20th July, 1956.
(2.) THE plaintiffs brought a suit for declaration that they had a field, khasra No. 119, and had a right of way through the defendants' fields Nos. 117 and 118 for the purpose of approach to the well situated in khasra No. 117, with the water whereof they had a right to irrigate their land. THE defendants denied the plaintiff's right to take water from the well in khasra No. 117, and also their right of way through plots Nos. 117 and 118. THE dispute is relating to the lands situated in village Nau Cheman, Tehsil Fatehpur. THE plaintiffs claimed a declaration of their right as also injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with their right. THE plaintiffs filed the suit in the court of Assistant Collector, Fatehpur, on 30. 10. 54, but on the enforcement of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act; the suit was transferred to the Court of Munsif, Sikar. THE learned Munsif has made this reference, as in his opinion this suit is triable by a revenue court. The suit relates to a dispute relating to a route by which the holder of land may have access to his fields, and is also in respect of the source by which the plaintiff may avail himself of the water. Provision has been made for application for settlement of such dispute in item 81 of Schedule III of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. The learned Munsif is of opinion that under sec. 207 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, the civil court has no jurisdiction in matters which can be dealt with by a suit or application to a revenue court, in accordance with the provisions of the Third Schedule. Item No. 81 refers to the dispute mentioned in sec. 251, but sub-sec. (2) of sec. 251 also provides that no order passed under sub-sec. (1) by the Tehsildar on application made to him in that behalf shall debar any person from establishing any such right or easement as he may claim by a regular suit in a competent civil court. The remedy referred to in sec. 251 is, therefore, a summary one, and does not debar a suit in a competent civil court. Sub-sec. (2), sec. 251, therefore, overrides sec. 207, and if an unsuccessful party can ultimately go to a civil court, there is no reason why the plaintiffs should not also in the first instance go to a civil court. The answer to the reference, therefore, is that this suit is triable by a civil court. Further proceedings will be taken according to law. .;