JUDGMENT D.S. Mathur, J. - This is a revision under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code by Brij Narain Verma, plaintiff, against the order dated 14-1-1963 of the Civil Judge of Moradabad, dismissing his appeal and thereby maintaining the order of the Additional Munsif, Moradabad, holding that the present suit was not cognizable by the civil court. At the same time, the plaint was ordered to be returned for presentation to the proper court. 2. The material facts of the case are that prior to the energising of the supply line laid by the Hydro Electric Department of the State of Uttar Pradesh it became necessary to cut down 32 trees from the grove of the plaintiff and the trees were cut after giving information to him. The dispute arose with regard to the payment of compensation. The plain tiff wanted the Department to pa} compensation for pre-mature cutting of the trees while the timber of the trees was to remain in his property The defendant on the other hand, wanted to remove the timber and to pay compensation for the trees including the timber. Eventually the Department approached the Magistrate who fixed the amount of compensation where after the trees were cut and removed. The Department auctioned the timber of the tree, and thus deprived the plaintiff of the timber also. The plaintiff accepted the compensation fixed by the Magistrate under protest and after serving a notice under Section 80, C.P.C., instituted the present suit for compensation not paid. 3. The point for consideration is whether the civil courts have the jurisdiction to entertain a suit for the recovery of compensation, or the only remedy available to the plaintiff was to apply to the District Judge under the provisions of Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. It can also be considered, in the alternative, whether the suit can proceed even if there is a provision for compulsory arbitration. 4. Section 51 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, gives power to the State Government to confer upon any public officer, licensee, or any other person engaged in the business of supplying energy to the public under this Act? 4. Section 51 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, gives power to the State Government to confer upon any public officer, licensee, or any other person engaged in the business of supplying energy to the public under this Act? many of the powers which the telegraph authority possesses under Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, with respect to the placing of telegraph lines and posts for, the purposes of a telegraph established or maintained by the Government or to be so established or maintained. The conferment of powers is subject to such conditions and restrictions as the State Government may think fit to impose and also to the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act. The conferment of this power is for the placing of electric supply lines, appliances, apparatus for the transmission of energy or for the purpose of telephonic or telegraphic communications necessary for the proper coordination of all works. The conferment of such powers is permissible even though such a power could not be exercised under Section 12 to 16, 18, and 19 of the Indian Electricity Act. 5. The notification under Section 51 of the Indian Electricity Act confers certain powers on officers and authorities named therein engaged in the business of supplying energy to the public. Such persons or authorities can exercise these powers and shall naturally be entitled to such protection as may be necessary for the exercise of such powers. The point, however, remains whether compensation payable is a part of the power such that the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act with regard to determination of compensation shall also be applicable where powers are exercised in pursuance of the notification under Section 51 of the Indian Electricity Act. 6. It is a settled rule that no prohibition as to the exercise of jurisdiction by the civil court can be assumed. There has to be a provision, direct or by implication, in some lair to deprive the civil court of its jurisdiction. Consequently, if the provisions of the Indian Electricity Act and also the Indian Telegraphs Act, do not at all suggest that the jurisdiction of the civil courts had been taken away, a civil suit shall be maintainable. 7. The notification issued under Section 51 of the Indian Electricity Act is a general one conferring all the powers which a telegraph authority possesses under the Indian Telegraph Act. 7. The notification issued under Section 51 of the Indian Electricity Act is a general one conferring all the powers which a telegraph authority possesses under the Indian Telegraph Act. Consequently, persons authorised can exercise the powers detailed in Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act. They can also move the District Magistrate under sub-Sec. (1) of Section 16 and a Magistrate of the first or second class under sub-Sec. (1) of Section 18 of this Act. Under Section 16(l) the District Magistrate can permit the telegraph authority to exercise the powers mentioned in Cl. (d) of the proviso to Section 10; while under Section 18(l) a Magistrate of the 1st or 2nd class can, on the application of the telegraph authority, cause the tree to be removed of dealt with in such other way as he deems fit. 8. Sub-Sec. (3) of Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act provides that if any dispute arises concerning the sufficiency of the compensation to be paid under Cl. (d) of Section 10, it shall be determined by the District Judge on an application being made to him by either of the parties. fire decision of the District Judge is final. Similarly, when disposing of an application under Section 18(l) of the Indian Telegraph Act, the Magistrate has to award to persons interested in the tree such compensation as he thinks reasonable and his award is also final. There can, therefore, be no dispute in that if action was taken by the telegraph authority any dispute concerning the sufficiency of compensation could not be raised before the civil court. In one case, the District Judge shall be the proper authority to determine the dispute and in the other, the Magistrate of the first or the second class who causes the tree to be removed or dealt with in such other way as he thinks fit. 9. The question arises whether these provisions can be made applicable to cases where the power under Cl. (d) of Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act is exercised by a person other than a telegraph authority. In case the person authorised under Sec 51 of the Indian Electricity Act is a licensee it can be said without any difficulty that disputes as to compensation shall be determined by arbitration. (d) of Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act is exercised by a person other than a telegraph authority. In case the person authorised under Sec 51 of the Indian Electricity Act is a licensee it can be said without any difficulty that disputes as to compensation shall be determined by arbitration. Section 19 of the Indian Electricity Act lays down that: "A licensee shall, in exercise of any of the powers conferred by or under this Act, cause as little darn. age, detriment and inconvenience as may be, and shall make full compensation for any damage, detriment or inconvenience caused by him or by anyone employed by him." 10. The words "conferred by or under this Act" are of great significance. Consequently, sub-Sec. (1) is applicable not only where the powers conferred by this Act are exercised but also where powers conferred under this Act are exercised. The notification under Section 51 of the Indian Electricity Act is issued under this Act and, consequently, powers exercised in pursuance of the notification are powers which are exercised under this Act. 11. Sub-Sec. (2) of Section 19 lays down the mode of determination of the compensation. It provides that "Save in the case provided for in Section 12, sub-Sec. (3), where any difference or dispute arises as to the amount or the application of such compensation, the matter shall be determined by arbitration." 12. As provided in Section 52 of the Indian Electricity Act the Arbitrator is to be nominated by the State Government on the application of either party and in all other respects the arbitration shall be subject to the provisions of the Arbitration Act. Consequently, where the person or authority conferred with powers of a telegraph authority under the notification under Section 51 of the Indian Electricity Act is a licensee, disputes as to the amount of compensation shall be determined by arbitration. When there exists a provision in the Indian Electricity Act corresponding provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act shall be inapplicable and with regard to licensee it cannot be said that he must make an application to the District Judge under Section 16 (3) of the Indian Telegraph Act. 13. When there exists a provision in the Indian Electricity Act corresponding provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act shall be inapplicable and with regard to licensee it cannot be said that he must make an application to the District Judge under Section 16 (3) of the Indian Telegraph Act. 13. The same law shall apply to a public officer, licensee or any other person conferred with powers under Section 51 of the Indian Electricity Act and, consequently, when the provisions of Section 16 (3) of the Indian Telegraph Act do not apply to a licensee they cannot be made applicable to other persons. 14. To sum up, there is no provision, direct or implied, in the Indian Electricity Act laying down that for the damage caused as a result of exercise of powers conferred under Section 51 of the Indian Electricity Act the compensation shall be determined in the manner laid down in Section 1e of the Indian Telegraph Act. When the provisions of the two Acts cannot lead us to the conclusion that the jurisdiction of the civil court had been barred, a civil suit shall be maintainable. It is a different thing that if there exists an arbitration agreement or there is compulsory arbitration, the court may stay the hearing of the suit under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Irrespective of whether the trial proceeds or is stayed under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, the suit is, at least at the stage of presentation cognizable by the civil court and the plaint cannot be ordered to be returned for presentation to the competent court. Both the lower courts have thus taken an erroneous view and as they failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in them, this court can, in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction, order, the hearing of the suit in accordance with the law. 15. The revision is hereby allowed and the orders of both the lower courts are set aside. The suit shall now be registered at its original number and disposed of in accordance with the law. Costs of all the courts shall abide the final decision of the suit.