Court No. 6 (265719) 19.08.2026 (AD 11) (S. Banerjee) CO 2687 of 2026 Rintu Kumar Mandal & Ors. Vs. Subol Mondal & Ors. Mr. Dhananjay Nayak …for the petitioners This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the plaintiffs and is directed against an order being no. 31 dated July 23, 2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) 2nd Court at Malda in Partition Suit No. 232 of 2022. By the order impugned, the learned trial judge has referred the dispute as to whether the defendant nos. 1, 2 and 3 are Bargadars in respect of the suit property to an authority under Section 18(1) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955. Mr. Nayak, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the defendant nos. 1, 2 and 3 failed to make out any prima facie case of Bargadarship. He submits that the matter cannot be referred to for the decision of the authority under Section 18(1) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 as the said defendants did not apply within the stipulated period of limitation as contained in the proviso to Section 18(1) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955. 2 The petitioners filed a suit for declaration that the defendant nos. 1, 2, and 3 do not have any right, title and interest in the Kha scheduled property and for a permanent injunction restraining the said defendants from creating any disturbance in the peaceful possession of the petitioners in respect of the property in question. In the written statement filed by the defendant nos. 1, 2, and 3 it is the specific case made out by the said defendants that they are Bargadars in respect of the suit property. Upon going through the pleadings of the respective parties it appears to this Court that a dispute has arisen as to whether the defendant nos. 1, 2, and 3 are Bargadars in respect of the suit property. Section 21(3) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 states that if any question as to whether a person is or is not a bargadar arises in the course of any suit, case, appeal or other proceedings before any Civil or Criminal Court, the Court shall refer it to the officer or authority mentioned in sub-section (1) of Section 18 for decision and such Court shall dispose of the suit, case, appeal or other proceedings in accordance with the decision communicated to it by the officer or authority mentioned in sub-section (1) of Section 18 to whom the question was referred. 3 In view of the provisions laid down under Section 21(3) of the 1955 Act, the Civil Court lacks jurisdiction to decide the issue as to whether the defendant nos. 1, 2 and 3 are Bargadars in respect of the suit property or not. The learned trial judge, in the considered view of this Court, was right in referring the dispute as to whether certain defendants are Bargadars or not under Section 21(3) of the 1955 Act to the officer or authority mentioned in Section 18(1) of the 1955 Act. This Court does not find any infirmity in the order impugned warranting interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, this civil revision application stands dismissed without, however, any order as to costs. It is, however, made clear that it will be open to the petitioners to raise all points before the authority under Section 18(1) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 to whom the matter has been referred to by the learned trial judge. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)