IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.438 of 2008 JAI KISHUN BHAGAT & ORS Versus PHUL MOHAMMAD & ORS ----------- 02/ 28.07.2010 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the State. The Civil Revision application is directed against the order dated 08.01.2008 passed by Sub- Judge VIIth, Siwan in Title Suit No. 86 of 2007, whereby the petition filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by the defendants-petitioners has been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioners raises a short point of law relying upon the provision of Section 16 of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), which bars the jurisdiction of Civil Courts and, inter alia, provides that no suit or such legal proceedings shall lie in any Court in respect of any order passed under this Act. Learned counsel thus submits that as the issue raised in the Title Suit in question was also subject matter of an Encroachment proceeding arising from Encroachment Case No. 4 of 2006-07, hence the suit so instituted by the plaintiff-opposite party was not maintainable in view of the stipulations present in Section 16 of the Act. The contention advanced on behalf of the petitioners has 2 been taken note by the court below and has been rejected, inter alia, on grounds that the suit in question raises other issues as well. I have perused the plaint which was produced by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, and considered the reliefs prayed. I do not find that the validity of the encroachment proceedings or any order passed thereunder, has been questioned in the suit. In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the order impugned requires no interference. The Civil Revision application is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)