ABDUL REJAK LASKAR versus MAFIZUR RAHMAN & ORS.

ABDUL REJAK LASKAR versus MAFIZUR RAHMAN & ORS.

The civil court's jurisdiction under Section 154(1)(e) is excluded only where an imperfect partition suit is otherwise maintainable under Section 97; if the statutory conditions for imperfect partition (notably actual possession and required consent) are not met and the revenue authority therefore refuses partition, the civil court retains jurisdiction to determine title and shares and to pass a decree declaring rights and directing the revenue authorities to effect partition; accordingly the Gauhati High Court erred in holding a blanket bar, and its judgment was set aside and the First Appellate Court order restored.

Parties
Appellant/original Plaintiff: Abdul Rejak Laskar; Respondents/original Defendants: Mafizur Rahman & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court From Gauhati High Court Judgment in RSA No. 243 of 2014 (civil Appeal No. 14805 of 2024)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Partition, Jurisdiction of Civil Courts, Section 154(1)(e) of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886, Section 97 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, Order XX Rule 18 CPC, Section 54 CPC
Property Law Revenue Law Civil Procedure Partition Jurisdiction of Civil Courts Section 154(1)(e) of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 Section 97 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 Order XX Rule 18 CPC +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abdul Rejak Laskar

Appellant/original Plaintiff

Mafizur Rahman & Ors.

Respondents/original Defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court From Gauhati High Court Judgment in RSA No. 243 of 2014 (civil Appeal No. 14805 of 2024)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Section 154(1)(e) of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 bars civil courts from entertaining a suit for imperfect partition in the facts of the case
  2. 2 Whether an imperfect partition suit is maintainable under Section 97 and when the bar in Section 154(1)(e) operates
  3. 3 Interaction between Section 54 CPC, Order XX Rule 18 CPC and the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 with respect to partition and execution

Ratio Decidendi

The civil court's jurisdiction under Section 154(1)(e) is excluded only where an imperfect partition suit is otherwise maintainable under Section 97; if the statutory conditions for imperfect partition (notably actual possession and required consent) are not met and the revenue authority therefore refuses partition, the civil court retains jurisdiction to determine title and shares and to pass a decree declaring rights and directing the revenue authorities to effect partition; accordingly the Gauhati High Court erred in holding a blanket bar, and its judgment was set aside and the First Appellate Court order restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order of the Gauhati High Court dated 22.08.2022 in RSA No. 243 of 2014 set aside
  • Order dated 16.05.2014 passed by the Civil Judge, Nagaon (Title Appeal No.30/2011) is restored