IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.290 of 2009 Ramadhar Sah @ Ram Autar Sah, son of Sheonandan Sah, resident of village- Rampurwa, Post Office- Brindavan Ashram, Police Station- Chanpatia, District- West Champaran. …..Defendant no.1……Petitioner Versus 1. Dhrup Sah, son of late Charitar Sah, resident of village- Rampurwa, Post Office- Brindavan Ashram, Police Station- Chanpatia, District- West Champaran. …..Plaintiff……Opp. Party 1st Set. 2. Bharat Sah, son of late Chandrika Sah. 3. Jogendra Sah, son of Charitar Sah 4. Bagar Sah, son of Charitar Sah All are residents of village- Rampurwa, Post Office- Brindavan Ashram, Police Station- Chanpatia, District- West Champaran. …..Defendant nos.2 to 4…Opp. Parties 2nd Set. ----------- 03- 16.11.2011 Heard Mr. Shiv Kumar Dwivedi for the petitioner, and Mr. Akhileshwar Kumar Shrivastava for opposite party nos.1 to 4. Defendant no. 1 of Title Suit No.123 of 2006, has filed this civil revision application under the provisions of section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and raises a grievance with respect to the order dated 22.12.2008, passed by the learned Additional Munsif 4th court, Bettiah, West Champaran, whereby he has rejected the objection of defendant no.1 (the petitioner herein), as to the maintainability of the suit on the ground that the proceeding under section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and 2 Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), alone could be competent. The issue raised by defendant no.1 has been rejected on the ground that, in view of the nature of the relief prayed for in the plaint and the nature of the cases of the parties, it is not a case for pre-emption within the meaning of section 16(3) of the Act. He has, therefore, held that the suit is competent. 2. Law is well settled that if a suitor seeks adjudication of rights and liabilities emanating exclusively from the specialized enactment, then he has to approach the forum created by the specialized enactment. However, if he seeks adjudication of rights and liabilities at the common law, though touching the specialized enactment, then the choice of forum lies with the suitor. Reference may be made to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the Premier Automobiles Ltd. Vs. Kamlakar Shantaram Wadke and others, (1976) 1, SCC 496: AIR 1975 SC 2238. In the instant case it is an important plank of the cases of the parties that the plot of land alienated by one of the defendants in favour of an outsider may be allotted to him in terms of section 4 of the Partition Act. This is not claiming a right under the 3 specialized enactment. Furthermore, a suit is the basic remedy for a citizen in this country for adjudication of civil rights and liabilities unless displaced by clear terms or by necessary intendment of the specialized enactment. The courts are reluctant to displace the maintainability of the suit unless a clear case is made out that it is exclusively covered by the specialized enactment. 3. We do not find any merit in this civil revision application. It is accordingly dismissed. (S K Katriar, J.) S.K.Pathak/