TMI Blog1976 (1) TMI 187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the first instance, he felt that the question as to how far the provisions of Madras Act X of 1969 oust the jurisdiction of the civil Court to decide the question whether a particular party is a cultivating tenant or not, was an important one which would arise in several litigations. On that view, he gave notice to the Advocates' Association., and Bar Association and desired that the matter should be decided by a Division Bench, and that is how it comes before us. Madras Act X of 1969 provides for the preparation and maintenance of record of tenancy rights in respect of agricultural lands in the State of Tamil Nadu. While the Act extends to the whole State, it has a definition section. A tenant in relation to any land, to which the M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cedure provided therein. Against orders under Sub-section (8) of Section 3, Sub-section (3) of Section 4 or Sub-section (3) of Section 5 appeals are provided with a period of limitation fixed for filing. A further remedy by way of revision also is provided. These are to be found in. Sections 6 and 7 of the Act. A further provision is made by Section 8 for amendment of approved record of tenancy rights to give effect to the orders under Section 6 or Section 7. There are then the provisions providing for obligation to furnish information, penalty for failure to furnish information as also for furnishing false information. Section 13 provides for certain cognizable offences. Section 15 lays down a rule of presumption, which says that any entry ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... should determine. The Court is also forbidden from granting injunction in respect of any action taken or to be taken by such officer or authority in pursuance of any power conferred by or under the Act. We are told that what led N.S. Ramaswami, J., to make the reference to a Division Bench was a consideration of the latter part of Section 15. Apparently he thought if an entry in the approved record of tenancy rights should be presumed to be true and correct until the contrary was proved or a new entry was lawfully substituted therefor, to that extent the civil Court's jurisdiction should not be taken to have been excluded. In other words, evidently his impression was that a certain area of civil Court's jurisdiction was still availa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
