Law: Punjab Tenancy Act, (XVI of 1887)

Section: 77(3)(e)(f)

Res judicata-Finding of Court of special and exclusive jurisdiction when res judicata in subsequent civil suit-Revenue Court deciding that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant-Decision not res judicata in subsequent suit for possession. According to a well recognized principle the of a Court of special or exclusive jurisdiction is binding on the parties in any suit between the same parties on a point which is within its special or exclusive jurisdiction. In order to apply this principle, however, one has to determine the criterion by which to find out whether a matter is within special jurisdiction so as to constitute res judicata. The test is if the matter was not already decided by the special Court could the civil Court have determined it? If it could, the matter would not be res judicata. The fields of jurisdiction and res judicata are contiguous. The one begins where the other ends, in other words, the fields of absence of jurisdiction and res judicata are coincident. A suit for ejectment was lodged in a Revenue Court. The Collector in appeal gave a finding that there was no relation of landlord and tenant between the parties and dismissed the suit. The plaintiff sued for possession in a civil Court. In order-to support a claim to adverse possession, the defendants argued that the Collector's finding was res judicata. Held, a consideration of the preamble and the provisions of the Punjab Tenancy Act [section 77 (3) (e) (f )] makes it clear it is intended to regulate the relationship of persons who are in fact landlord and tenant. Once that relationship is established, the rights of the persons inter se (in so far as provisions exist in the Tenancy Act for the Act is not exhaustive) .are governed by the Act. But the Revenue Courts have no jurisdiction to make binding declaration of rights as between persons between whom they find this relationship absent. In such a case they simply refuse to exercise jurisdiction. The finding about absence of relationship of landlord and tenant was therefore not res judicata. Baru and others v. Niadar and others A I R 1942 Lah. 217, Joti and another v. Maya and others 44 P R 1891, Kesar Singh and Vir Singh v.…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492