JUDGMENT 1. THIS Rule is directed against an appellate order, by which a learned Munsif set aside the order of a Revenue Officer directing eviction of a bargadar from the land in question on the ground of the requirement of the landlord, and remanded the matter to the said Revenue Officer for a fresh trial. 2. THE question that arises for our determination is whether a Munsif, in exercise of his jurisdiction under section 19 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, has the power to remand any matter to the Revenue Officer. Section 19 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act is herein below set out: "sec. 19 (1) : An appeal shall lie to the Munsif, having jurisdiction over the area in which the land is situated, against any order made under section 17 or section 18 except where such order was made with the consent of the parties to the dispute. The Munsif shall, on an appeal being disposed of, send a copy of his order to the officer or authority whose decision is appealed against. (2) The period within which the appeal mentioned in sub-section (1) must be filed shall be thirty days from the date of the order appealed against. " 3. SECTION 20 (1) of the said Act, prescribing procedure for such appeals is as follow: "the procedure to be followed in deciding disputes or appeals under this chapter (meaning Chapter III which contains sec. 19) and the fees to be paid by the parties shall be as may be prescribed. " 4. SECTION 60 of the said Act invests the State Government with power to make rules for the purpose of carrying out the purposes of the Act and the rules so made have the effect as if they were incorporated in the Act it self. Rule 7 framed under the rule making power is herein below set out: "rule 7. Procedure for appeals (1) Every appeal shall be filed in the form of a memorandum and shall be signed and verified by the appellant in the manner provided in sub-rules (2) and (3) of rule 15 of Order VI of Schedule I to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Procedure for appeals (1) Every appeal shall be filed in the form of a memorandum and shall be signed and verified by the appellant in the manner provided in sub-rules (2) and (3) of rule 15 of Order VI of Schedule I to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 'it shall be accompanied by an authenticated copy of the order appealed against and shall contain the following particulars: (a) the name and address of the appellant; (b) the name and address of the respondent ; (c) the location of the land cultivated by the bargadar; and (d) the grounds of appeal. (2) The court-fees payable on a Memorandum of Appeal under sub-section (1) of section 19 shall be such as are provided [in sub-clause (ii) of clause (a) of Article 11 of Schedule II to the Court-fees Act, 1870], and shall be collected in the manner laid down in that Act, (3) On the filing of an appeal the Appellate Officer shall call for the records of the case from the officer or authority against whose order the appeal has been filed and after giving the appellant and the respondent an opportunity of, being heard shall dispose of the appeal. (4) Every appeal shall be disposed of by the Appellate Officer within one month from the date of filing of the appeal. " It was contended before us that the Munsif exercising appellate powers under section 19 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act was not a civil court but a mere persona designata. Statutorily his power was confined to disposing of an appeal as best as he could, that is to say, to adjudicate upon or to determine an appeal but he had no power of remand. 5. A similar point arose before Mitter, J., in (1) Civil Revision Case No. 2016 of 1958 (Gouranga Mahakur v. Murari Mohan Routh), His Lordship held in favour of the existence of the power of remand with the following observation : "Mr. Panda in support of the Rule has contended that the appellate authority had no power to remand the case, the power of remand not having been expressly given to the appellate authority. Mr. Panda has also referred me to the provisions of section 19 of the Act. In my view the power of remind for the purpose of disposing of an appeal is inherent in appellate authority. Mr. Panda has also referred me to the provisions of section 19 of the Act. In my view the power of remind for the purpose of disposing of an appeal is inherent in appellate authority. I hold therefore, that the appellate authority had jurisdiction to remand the cast. " 6. THERE is no doubt that all Civil Courts have inherent power of remand. But if a Munsif exercising appellate power under section 19 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, is not a Civil Court but a mere persona designata, as was contended for before us, it may be difficult to hold that even as a persona designata he has an inherent power of remand. The question for our consideration is whether the Munsif functioning under section 19 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act is a Civil Court or a mere persona designata. The jurisdiction exercised by the learned Munsif under section 19 was no part of his ordinary jurisdiction. Therefore, the jurisdiction is either a special jurisdiction conferred on him in his capacity as an ordinary court of the country or is a jurisdiction conferred on him as a person or a named officer not in his capacity as an ordinary court of the country. 7. SECTION 19 and Rule 7, quoted above, give no indication as to the capacity in which the Munsif functions in exercise of his appellate powers. 8. SECTION 21 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act however gives an indication as to the capacity in which a Munsif functions under Section 19. Section 21 is set out below : "21 (1) Save as provided in section 19, no order or other proceedings whatsoever under this Chapter shall be questioned in any civil court, and no civil court shall entertain any suit or proceeding in respect of any matter mentioned in "sections 17 and 18. " (2 ). " The original order for eviction of the bargadar by the Revenue Officer was passed under section 17 on grounds (c), (d) of the said section. An appeal against that order was made to the Munsif under section 19. Under the provision of section 21 such an order must be taken as being questioned, by way of appeal, before the Munsif as a Civil Court and not as a persona designata. 9. IT is beyond dispute that civil courts have inherent power of remand. An appeal against that order was made to the Munsif under section 19. Under the provision of section 21 such an order must be taken as being questioned, by way of appeal, before the Munsif as a Civil Court and not as a persona designata. 9. IT is beyond dispute that civil courts have inherent power of remand. Therefore, the learned Munsif functioning as a Civil Court, had jurisdiction to remand and his order cannot be questioned on the ground as was sought to be done in this Rule. Rule is accordingly discharged with costs, hearing fee being assessed at two gold mohurs.