AIR 1992 SUPREME COURT 1318 ::1992 AIR SCW 1316 ::1992 ALL. L. J. 535 ::1992 (3) SCC 90 ::1992 (2) All CJ 1262 ::(1992) 2 All WC 1153 ::(1992) 2 SCJ 463 ::(1992) 2 SCR 640 (SC) ::1992 (2) SCR 640 ::(1992) 3 JT 55 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Allahabad)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): M. Fathima Beevi, S. C. Agrawal , JJ

Civil P.C. (5 of 1908) , S.9— Jurisdiction of Court - Suit for ejectment and possession of land - Question whether suit land is or is not used for purposes connected with agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry - Cannot be determined by Civil Court - It is to be determined under provisions of Ss.143, 144 and 331A of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1955. Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (1 of 1951) , S.331A, S.143, S.144— Civil Revn. No. 3770 of 1978, D/-2-4-1980 (All), Reversed. The scheme of the provisions contained in S.143, S.144 and S.331-A is that the question whether a particular land is or is not used for the purposes connected with agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry has to be determined either under S.143 or S.144 and where no such determination has been made, it should be determined by following the procedure laid down in S.331-A. It is not open to a Court dealing with a suit in which the said question arises to by pass the provisions of Section 331-A and to proceed to determine the said question itself. This would be so even in a case where a building exists on the land and the land is claimed to be apprutenant to the building i.e. whether the entire land or only a part of it is so apprutenant to the building and for that reason is not held or occupied for purposes connected with agriculture, horticultur....