Bapna, J—This is a reference by the Munsif, Jhalrapatan, under sec. 40 of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts (Procedure and Jurisdiction) Act, 1951. 2. Kishna and another filed a suit for redemption of certain agricultural land in the Court of Munsif, Jhalrapatan, on 23rd May, 1950. The defendants denied the mortgagors title to the land as also the fact of the mortgage. On the enforcement of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Procedure and Jurisdiction) Act, the learned Munsif transferred the suit to the Court of Assistant Collector by order dated 5th March, 1951. The Assistant Collector dismissed the suit after trial on 6th November, 1952, but on appeal the case was remanded for a fresh trial by the Collector At this stage the learned Assistant Collector was of opinion that certain issues relevant in the suit related to an enquiry about the proprietary title to land, and he, therefore, made an order remitting issues Nos. 1, 4, and 5 for trial by the civil court under sec. 36 of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts (Procedure and Jurisdiction) Act. The learned Munsif of Jhalrapatan, however, was of opinion that no question of proprietary title was involved in the suit, and that the suit was triable by a revenue court. He accordingly made this reference by an order dated 4th February, J954, 3. A suit for redemption is not among the suits enumerated in Group A or Group B of the First Schedule to the Act, and only reference regarding redemption is to be found in Group D, which relates to an application by a mortgagor for redemption of land and for redelivery of possession, for which the proper court-fee is mentioned as annas -/8/-. This is item 5, and it relates to an application provided by sec. 83 of the Transfer of Property Act, and does not refer to a suit for redemption, which right is enumerated in sec. 60 of the Transfer of Property Act. That right can only be enforced by a suit, if the mortgagee is not prepared to redeem on demand or on application under sec. 83 of the Transfer of Property Act. 83 of the Transfer of Property Act, and does not refer to a suit for redemption, which right is enumerated in sec. 60 of the Transfer of Property Act. That right can only be enforced by a suit, if the mortgagee is not prepared to redeem on demand or on application under sec. 83 of the Transfer of Property Act. It has been held by a single Judge of this Court in Shri Chand vs. Daulat Ram (5) that a suit for redemption is triable by a revenue court under item 5 Group D, Schedule First; The distinction that Group D relates to an application and not to a suit does not seem to have been kept in view. Again, the two remedies one by application and the other by suit are two distinct rights provided separately in the Transfer of Property Act. As a suit to redeem has not been included in either Group A or Group B, that suit is not triable by a revenue court. The view taken in Shri Chand vs. Daulat Ram does not appear to be correct. 4. We, therefore, held that the suit as framed is triable by a civil court. It is, therefore, not necessary to decided whether certain issues remitted by the Assistant Collector are, or are not, triable by a civil court, as the whole suit is triable by that court. The suit is, therefore, transferred for trial from the court of Assistant Collector, Jhalawar, to the court of Munsif, Jhalrapatan.