Niranjan Panigrahi and Others vs Shyamsundar Pratihari

P.K. Mohanti, J.—This Second Appeal was preferred by the Plaintiffs on 18-11-1974 against a decree of affirmance. The suit was for declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of plot No. 1118 measuring 0.60 acre in village Biswanathpur and plot No. 1119 measuring 0.32 acre in village Biswanathpur Kharida.

On 22-11-1977 the learned Counsel for the Respondent filed a memo stating therein that the suit out of which this second appeal arises has abated under the provisions of the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972 on the publication of a Notification under Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Act in the Official Gazette dated 9-4-1976. The Plaintiffs-Appellants filed an affidavit on 9-12-1977 stating therein that the Notification u/s 3(1) of the Act applies only to village Biswanathpur and not to village Biswanathpur Kharida and moreover, the suit land being an arch ad consisting of 45 to 50 cocoanut trees it is not at all consolidable and the consolidation authorities have no jurisdiction over the same. The Respondent filed a counter affidavit on 14-12-1977 stating therein that Biswanathpur and Biswanathpur Kharida are included in one revenue village, namely. Biswanathpur and that there is no separate revenue village as Biswanathpur Kharida. It was also stated that the suit land is not an orchid, but it is an agricultural land with some cocoanut trees existing thereon.

The relevant portion of Section 4 of the Act runs thus:

Effect of notification - Upon the publication of the notification issued under Sub-section (1) of Section 3 in the Official Gazette, the consequences as hereinafter setforth, shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, ensue in the consolidation area till the publication of notification u/s 41 or Sub-section (1) of Section 5, as the case may be

xxx xxx xxx

(4) every suit and proceedings for declaration of any right or interest in any land situate within the consolidation area in regard to which proceedings could be or ought to be started under this Act, which is pending before any Civil Court, whether of the first instance or appeal, reference or revision shall, on an order being passed in that behalf by the Court before which such suit or proceeding is pending, stand abated,

The expression "land" used in Sub-section (4) of Section 4 has been defined u/s 2(0) to mean land of whatever description.

"Agricultural land" as defined u/s 2(b) of the Act means land held or occupied for agriculture or for purposes connected with agriculture and includes trees existing on such land.

The expression "consolidation area" has been defined u/s 2(g) to mean the area in respect of which a notification under Sub-section (J) of Section 3 has been issued.

The Respondent has produced a certified copy of the R. O. R. of the current settlement which shows that both the suit plots have been recorded as "Biali Dofasal" which means agricultural land yielding double crops. It is common ground that some cocoanut trees are existing on the land. It appears, however, that paddy is grown on the land and on 18-12-1975 Appellant No. 1 claimed Rs. 385/- towards paddy from the suit land against the receiver appointed by the Munsif, Bhubaneswar. In view of the definition of "agricultural land" given in Section 2(b) of the Act there can be no manner of doubt that the suit land is agricultural land even though some cocoanut trees are existing on the same. Both the plots are situated at village Biswanathpur which is a revenue village. There is no material on the record to show that Biswanathpur and Biswanathpur Kharida are separate revenue villages. In the Notification u/s 3(1) of the Act the revenue village Biswanathpur has been mentioned as an area under consolidation operation.

Section 51 of the Act provides:

51 Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, but subject to the provisions contained in Clause (3) of Section 4 and Sub-section (1) of Section 7 -

(1) all questions relating to right title, interest and liability in land lying in the consolidation area, except those coming within the jurisdiction of Revenue Courts or authorities under any local law for the time being in force, shall be decided under the provisions of this Act by the appropriate authority during the consolidation operations; and

(2) no Civil Court shall entertain any suit or proceeding in respect of any matter which an officer or authority empowered under this Act is competent to decide.

It is clear from the above provisions that the Civil Court�s jurisdiction to entertain suits involving declaration of rights and interests in the lands situate within consolidation areas has been barred for the duration ot consolidation operations. The consolidation authorities have been vested with the powers to decide such questions in the course of consolidation proceedings.

The land in suit being situate within the consolidation area, or suit or appeal for declaration of title in respect thereof shall stand abated on the publication of the Notification issued u/s 3(1) of the Act. The contention of the Appellants that the land in suit is not consolidable and that the consolidation authorities have no jurisdiction over the same is not acceptable in view of the definition of the expression "land" as given in Section 2(0) of the Act.

In the premises aforesaid, the appeal stands abated u/s 4(4) of the Act.

Appeal stands abated.