JUDGMENT D. P. Sinha, J. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated the 3rd October, 1972 passed by the Second Addl. Subordinate Judge of Muzaffarpur in Title Partition Suit No. 44/41 of 1965/70. The appellants were the defendants first party to the suit. The respondents first party were the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs had prayed for a declaration of their title and recovery of possession with respect to lands specified in schedule IV of the plaint having an area of 3 bighas 19 kathas which had been held in a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure between the parties to be in possession of the appellants by an order dated the 3rd January 1965. It was alleged that as a result of that order the plaintiffs had also prayed, in the alternative, for a decree for partition of the lands mentioned in schedule V of the plaint and for allotment of a separate takhta to them in respect of their share amounting to 2/9ths therein and a share to the extent of 5/6ths in a jack fruit tree standing on plot no. 22. The suit has been decreed in full. 2. The defendant appellants has raised the plea of non-maintainability, previous partition and resjudicata. It is not necessary to set forth the details of the cases of the parties for the present purpose. It has been contended on behalf of the appellants that in view of the provisions of Section 4 (1) (c) of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") the appeal stands abated as a notification under Section 3 (1) of the Act, has been issued declaring the intention of the State Government to make a scheme for consolidation of holdings in the area in which the lands in the suit are situate. 3. Section 3 (1) of the Act, provides as follows: 3. 3. Section 3 (1) of the Act, provides as follows: 3. Declaration by State Government of its intention to make scheme for consolidation of holdings: (1) With the object of effecting consolidation of holdings in any area, the State Government may, after such enquiries as it may deem fit, by notification in the official gazette declare its intention to make a scheme for consolidation of holdings in that area." The effect and consequences of publication of the notification under Sub-section (1) of Section 3 are provided in Section 4 of the Act, the provisions of which, relevant for the present purpose are as follows: "(1) Upon the publication of notification under Sub-section (1) of Section 3 in the official gazette, the consequence, as hereinafter set forth shall subject to the provisions of this Act, from the date specified in the notification till the close of the consolidation operation, ensue in the area to which the notification relates, Viz. (a) x x x x (b) no suit or other legal proceedings in respect of any land in such areas shall be entertained in any court and in calculating period of limitation applicable to such suits and proceedings such period shall not be counted provided. (a) x x x x (b) no suit or other legal proceedings in respect of any land in such areas shall be entertained in any court and in calculating period of limitation applicable to such suits and proceedings such period shall not be counted provided. (c) every proceeding for the correction of records and every suit and proceedings in respect of declaration of rights or interest in any land lying in the area or for declaration or adjudication of any other right in regard to which proceedings can or ought to be taken under this Act, pending before any court or authority, or authority whether of the first instance or of appeal, reference or revision shall, on an order being passed in that behalf by the court or authority before whom such suit or proceeding is pending stand abated: provided also that no such order shall be passed without giving to the parties notice by post of any other manner that maybe convenient and after giving them an opportunity of being heard; Provided further that such abatement shall be without prejudice to the rights of the persons affected to agitate the right or interest in disputes in the said suits or proceedings before the appropriate consolidation authorities under and in accordance with the provisions of this Act, and the rules made thereunder x x x X" It is not in dispute that a notification under Section 3 (1) of the Act, by the State Government has been duly published in the official gazette relating to the area within which the lands in suit are situate. The contention of Mr. K. K. Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff is that Section 4 (1) speaks of every proceeding for the correction of records and every suit and proceeding in respect of declaration or adjudication of any other right In regard to which proceeding can or ought to be taken under the Act; it does not speak of a suit for possession and that, therefore, this appeal which was not only a suit for declaration of title but also for recovery of possession and mesne profits was not covered by the provisions of the said clause. 4. 4. I do not think the above argument has any substance In it, The provisions of clause (c) have been expressed in very wide terms and it is quite apparent that the relief of possession and mesne profits which had been sought in the suit could only be granted on the basis of a declaration of Plaintiff's right or interest in the land in suit. In short in every suit for recovery of possession of land and mesne profits, as in this suit, a declaration of the right or interest on the basis of which the prayer is made has necessarily to be made and without such a declaration no relief with regard to possession or mesne profits can be granted. The suit in question is, therefore, clearly one covered by the provisions of clause (c), 5, A similar argument based upon the provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as "the U.P. Act") had been raised 'in the case of Ram Adhar Singh V. Rameshwar Singh and others before the Supreme Court. It would appear that the provisions of the said Sub-section (2) (at of the U. P. Act, which are extracted below are identical, word for word, with the provisions of Clause (c) of Section 4 of the Act: "(a) every proceeding for the correction of records and every suit and proceeding in respect of declaration of rights or interest in any land lying in the area Or for declaration or adjudication of any other right in regard to which proceedings can Or ought to be taken under this Act. pending before any Court or authority whet her of the first instance of appeal reference or revision shall on an order being passed in that behalf by the Court or authority before whom such suit or proceeding is pending stand abated"; The suit had been instituted under section 209 of U. P. Zamindari abolition and Land Reforms Act, for recovery of possession on the basis that the plaintiff was a Bhumidar and the defendant appellants were mere trespassers. The trial court as well as the appellate court held that the plaintiff was Bhumidar of the land the appellant had not established his tenancy right in the land as such he was neither a Sirdar nor an asami but a mere trespasser. The trial court as well as the appellate court held that the plaintiff was Bhumidar of the land the appellant had not established his tenancy right in the land as such he was neither a Sirdar nor an asami but a mere trespasser. A second appeal to the High Court also failed and the defendant preferred an appeal to the Supreme Court. After the grant of special leave by the Supreme Court the State of Uttar Pradesh published in the State Gazette a notification under section 4 of the U. P. Act, the effect of that notification being that the lands in dispute between the parties were brought under the consolidation operation. It was contended on behalf of the appellant that by virtue of Section 5 of the U. P. Act, there was nothing further to be done by the Supreme Court in the appeal except to passing an order that the appeal stood abated. Two contentions were raised on behalf of the plaintiff respondent of which one is relevant for the present purpose. It was as follows 'suits for recovery of possession of land from trespassers did not come within the purview of section 5". The Supreme Court repelled the contention of the plaintiff respondent in the following words which support the view I have taken :- "Suit for possession as such has not been expressly referred to in the new section 5, but, in our opinion the expression "every suit and proceeding in respect of declaration of rights Or interest in any land" are comprehensive enough to take in suits for possession of land. because before a claim for possession is accepted. the court will have necessarily to adjudicate upon the right of interest of the plaintiffs, in respect of disputed property taking into account the claim of the opposite party. Therefore, in our opinion, the suit instituted by the respondent, is covered by the amended Section 5 of the Act" (The amended Section (2) (a) of section 5 has been quoted earlier). It may be mentioned that the principle decided in Ram Adhar Singh's case has been reiterated and followed by the Supreme Court in Chattal' Singh and others Vs. Thakur Prasad Singh. 6. It may be mentioned that the principle decided in Ram Adhar Singh's case has been reiterated and followed by the Supreme Court in Chattal' Singh and others Vs. Thakur Prasad Singh. 6. The following provisions of the Act, clearly indicate that the parties would be free to raise dispute with regard to the rights claimed by them in the suit and have it decided finally by the authorities under the Act, at the appropriate stage of the consolidation proceedings. 7. The Act, is intended to provide for consolidation and prevention of fragmentation of holdings. Section 3 (1) provides that with the object of effecting consolidation of holdings for the better cultivation of lands in any area, the State Government may after such enquiries as it may deem fit, by notification in the official Gazette, declare its intention to make a scheme for the consolidation of holdings in that area. Sub section (2) thereof provides for publication of the notification by beat of drum in the villages comprised in that notification and copies of notifications shall be hung up at the offices of all the Grama- Panchyats if any, the police stations, the offices of the Anchal Adhikaris and at village cutcheries of the State Government for collection of rent in such area. Section 4 states what would be the effect and consequences of the notification under Sub-section (1) of Section 3. The relevant provisions of Section 4 have been quoted earlier. Section 4 states what would be the effect and consequences of the notification under Sub-section (1) of Section 3. The relevant provisions of Section 4 have been quoted earlier. Section 6 days down the procedure for according sanction to a person intending to transfer or partition of any land and for hearing the parties with regard thereto by Consolidation officer after service of notice on the parties and publication of the land in the office after service of notice on the parties and publication of the land, in the office of the Consolidation officer and in such other places as may by prescribed and that after hearing the parties and after such enquiry as may be necessary, the Consolidation officer may pass such order as he thinks fit provided that he shall not refuse sanction for transfer or partition of any land except on anyone Or more of the grounds mentioned in the provisions to sub-section (3) of Section 4 thereof provided that any person aggrieved by the order of the Consolidation officer made under Section 3 may within 30 days of the order prefer an appeal before the Assistant Director of Consolidation and the appeal shall be heard and disposed of according to the prescribed procedure and the decision of the Assistant Director of Consolidation shall be final. 8. Section 8 (1) of the Act, provides that save as provided in Sub-section (2) with which we are not concerned for the present, as soon as may be after the publication of the notification under section 3, an upto date record of rights in respect of the lands comprised in the notified area together with a map shall be prepared in accordance with the provisions of Chapter X of the Bihar Tenancy Act, 1885, or as the case may be Chapter XII of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 or the Santhal Parganas Settlement Regulation, 1972. Section 9 provides that when the record of rights and maps are deemed to have been brought up to date, there shall be prepared in the prescribed form a register of lands belonging to raiytas which shall contain the following particulars: the name of the raiyats; area and serial number of the plots of land held by the raiyat if any having a right of occupancy, non-occupancy, classification of each plots of land held by under raiyat if any having right to occupancy therein, and the other particulars specified therein which are not relevant for the present purpose. The principles to be followed in carrying out the consolidation proceedings are; to be determined in accordance with the provisions of section 9A. Section 10 provides that the register so prepared under Section 2A shall be published for at least 30 days in the prescribed manner and thereupon any person may, as provided in Sub-section (2) within 45 days from the date of publication thereof prefer objection before the Assistant Consolidation Officer. Sub-section (3) provided that after hearing the persons interested and after necessary enquiries the Assistant Consolidation Officer shall as far as may be possible, decide the dispute or objection by way of compromise between the parties before him and shall pass order on the basis thereof. Sub-section (4) days down that in case he is not able to so decide the objection or dispute, he shall forward together with any dispute relating to valuation of plots, structures trees etc. and the question of apportionment amongst the co-owners to the Consolidation Officer, who shall dispose of the same in the prescribed manner. Sub section (6) provided that any person aggrieved by an order of the Assistant Consolidation Officer made under (5) may, within 30 days of such order file an appeal before the Assistant Director of Consolidation whose decision shall, except as otherwise provided by or under the Act, be final. 9. Section 10-A placed a bar against raising of any question in respect of any entry made in the map or register prepared under Section 9 or the statement of principles prepared under section 9A to be followed in carrying out the consolidation operations, which might or ought to have been raised under Section 10 but has not been raised. 9. Section 10-A placed a bar against raising of any question in respect of any entry made in the map or register prepared under Section 9 or the statement of principles prepared under section 9A to be followed in carrying out the consolidation operations, which might or ought to have been raised under Section 10 but has not been raised. Section 10B provides that all matters relating to changes and transfers of land published under Sub-Section (1) of Section 10 for which cause of action had not arisen when proceedings under Sections 8 and 9 were started or were in progress, may be raised before the Assistant Consolidation Officer and when they arise but not later than the date of the notification under Section 26A the Act, by which the consolidation operation a re declared to have been closed or under Sub-section (1) of Section 4 by which the State Government may cancel the notification under section 3(1). 10. Section 11 provided for the preparation of draft consolidation scheme after the objections if any made under Subsection (2) of Section 10 have been disposed of. It lays elaborately the factors to be kept in view in preparation of the draft scheme and the particulars to be specified therein. Sub section (I) of Section 12 requires the draft scheme to be published and Sub-section (2) thereof provides that subject to the provisions contained in Section 10-A any person whose right or interest is substantially prejudiced or affected by the draft scheme or who disputes the propriety Or correctness of the entries in the draft scheme Or the extracts furnished therefrom may within 30 days of the publication of the draft scheme file objection before the Assistant Consolidation Officer and provisions for the disposal of objection received by the Assistant Consolidation Officer and by the Consolidation Officer have been made in Section 12A. Any person aggrieved by the order of the consolidation officer may, within 30 days of the date of the order file an appeal before the Assistant Director of Consolidation whose decision shall except as otherwise provided by or under the Act, be final. 11. U/s 40 the Govt. may make rules providing for all or any of the matter enumerated therein Including the procedure to be followed in filing applications and appeals and in hearing and disposing of such applications and appeals. 12. 11. U/s 40 the Govt. may make rules providing for all or any of the matter enumerated therein Including the procedure to be followed in filing applications and appeals and in hearing and disposing of such applications and appeals. 12. Section 35 provides that the Director of Consolidation. may of his own motion or on the application of any party or on reference being made by any subordinate authority, call for and examine the record of any case decided or proceedings taken by such authority for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the regularity of the proceedings or as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any order passed by such authority in the case or proceedings and may after allowing the parties concerned an opportunity of being heard make such order in the case or proceedings as he thinks fit. 13. Section 37 Jays down that no civil court shall entertain any suit or application to vary or set aside any decision or order given or passed under this Act, with respect to any other matter for which a proceeding could or could not have been taken under the Act. A reference may also be made to two other Sections which follows Section 37. 14. Section 37A provides that not-withstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Director of Consolidation, the Deputy Director of Consolidation, the Assistant Director of Consolidation, the Consolidation officer shall be deemed to be courts of competent jurisdiction while hearing objections or appeals for deciding dispute under the Act. 15. Section 37B provides that the above authorities under the Act, shall have all such powers, rights and privileges while hearing any matter in dispute as are vested in a civil court in respect of the matter specified therein. 16. I have made no reference to Section 14 to 34 of the Act, as they relate to matters with which we are not concerned in the present controversy which relates only to the question as to whether the appeal stands abated by reason of the provisions of section 4(1) (c) of the Act. 17. It would appear from the above analysis of the Act, that the legislature has made the Act, self contained with regard to determination of the matters which mayor ought to be raised before the authorities prescribed under the Act. 17. It would appear from the above analysis of the Act, that the legislature has made the Act, self contained with regard to determination of the matters which mayor ought to be raised before the authorities prescribed under the Act. It has also been found that the decision of the authorities on such matters is to be final and the civil court will have no jurisdiction to interfere with anything done by the authorities in accordance with the provisions of the Act; the question which arises in the suit and in this appeal can undoubtedly be raised before the said authorities and t hey will be competent to decide the same. 18. After the matter had been heard and judgment reserved a prayer for giving opportunity for further arguments was made on behalf of respondents and accordingly, further arguments were heard on behalf of the respondents that whereas in the U.P. Act, there was specified provisions in Section 9 read with Section 9A for determination of the rights and liabilities in relation to the lands brought under the consolidation proceeding, there was no such provisions in the Act, (Bihar Act) and that, therefore the observations of the Supreme Court in Ramadhar Singh'8 case were of no help in determining the present controversy and that it should be held that since rights and liabilities cannot be determined under the Act, the appeal bas not abated. 19. The argument has little force the relevant provisions of the U. P. Act, are as follows :- "9 Issue of extract from records and statements and publications of records mentioned in Section 8 and 8-A and the issue of notices for inviting objections ;- (1) Upon the preparation of the records and the statements mentioned in Section 8 and 8-A the Assistant Consolidation Officer shall;- (a) Correct the clerical mistakes if any and or cause to be sent to the tenure holders concerned and other persons interested, notices containing relevant extracts from the current annual register and such other records as may be prescribed showing: (i) their rights in and liabilities in relation to the lands. (ii) x x x (iii) specific shares of individual tenure holders in joint holding for the purpose of effecting partitions were necessary to ensure proper consolidation (iv) x x x (v) x x x (2) Any person to whom a notice under Sub-Section (1) has been sent or any other persons interested, may within 21 days of the receipt of notice Or of the application under Sub-section (i) as the case may be file before the Assistant Consolidation Officer, objection in respect thereof disputing the correctness or nature of the entries in the records or in the extract furnished therefrom or the statement of principles or the need for partition. The provisions relating to the disposal of objections as provided in Section 9A of the U.P. Act, by the Asstt. Consolidation Officer and by the Consolidation Officer in case of failure of conciliation are substantially the same as those contained in Sec. 10 of the Act. 20. It is true that in Section 9 (2) of the Act, which relates to the preparation of register of binds, there is no specific mention that rights and liabilities in relation of the raiyats are to enter in the register though it provides - that the register (of lands) belonging to the raiyats shall contain among other things specified therein, the name of the raiyat, the areas and serial number of the plots of land held by him having right of occupancy therein, the area and serial numbers of plot of land held by raiyats if any having no rights of occupancy therein. Under Sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Act, objections disputing the correctness and nature of the entries in the statement of principles may be raised within the period prescribed therein. It would appear that although in Sub-section (2) it is not mentioned specifically that the rights and liabilities of the raiyat In land shall be recorded in t be register of lands, the legislature did intend that same shall be recorded therein. This is quite apparent from the following extract from Sub-section (2) of Section 11 of the Act, :- "(2) The Village Advisory Committee and the Asstt. This is quite apparent from the following extract from Sub-section (2) of Section 11 of the Act, :- "(2) The Village Advisory Committee and the Asstt. Consolidation Officer shall in preparation of a scheme of consolidation keep the following factors in view, namely, (a) the rights and liabilities of a raiyat as recorded in the register of lands prepared under Section 9 and secured in the lands allotted to him, but subject to the deduction to public purposes under this Act", The same inference follows from Sub-5ection (2) of Section 12 of the Act, which relates to publication of the draft consolidation the relevant provisions of which follows; scheme, are as (2) subject to the provisions contained in Section 10-A any person whose right or interest is substantially prejudiced Or affected by the draft consolidations scheme or who disputes the propriety and correctness of the entries in the draft consolidation scheme or the extracts furnished therefrom, may within thirty days of the date of publication of the draft consolidation scheme rile an objection before the Asstt. Consolidation Officer stating: (i) the nature of his interest or right in or over any land, (ii) the manner in which such interest or right is likely to be adversely affected, and (iii) the amount and particulars of his claim to the amount, if any, for such interest or right." Section 12-A provides for disposal of such objection as has already been pointed out. It is thus quite apparent from the said provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 11 read with those of Section 9 (2) (of the Act) that objections with regard to the right Or interest or liability in or over any lands may be raised by any person whose right or interest is prejudiced or affected by the entries made in the register of lands prepared under Section 9 (2). 21. From the above discussions it is clear that the dispute involved in the suit under appeal may and ought to be raised before the authorities under the Act, and, therefore the appeal is hit by the provisions of clause (c) of Section 4 of the Act, and the suit as also the appeal stand abated as a result of the publication of the notifications under Section 3 (1) of the Act. 22. 22. It was contended on behalf of the respondents that there should be an order only to the effect that the appeal stood abated and that no order should be passed saying or declaring that the suit too had abated. This argument was based on the form of the order passed by the Supreme Court in Ramadhar Singh's case (supra) The Supreme Court had passed the order in the following form in the concluding part of the judgment. "(14) The result is that C. M. P.2631 of 1967 is allowed and it is declared that Civil Appeal No. 691 of 1966 has abated under the amended Section 5 of the Act. The civil appeal is also disposed of as having abated for the reasons given by us when dealing with the civil miscellaneous petition. Parties will bear their own costs in both the matters." I do not think the Supreme Court while recording the order in the above form, intended by that order to say that although the civil appeal had abated under the amended Section 5 of the U. P. Act, the suit did not abate. It is well established and known that the effect of the order of the Supreme Court was clear from the following observations made earlier in paragraph 12 of the judgment. : "12 Having regard to the nature of this litigation and' the provisions of the Act, we are satisfied that the amended Section 5 of the Act, applies to these proceedings. If that is then the order has to be passed that the suit, out of which there proceedings arise stands abated". 23. This is also manifest from the express provisions of clause (c) of Section 4 of the Act, which, shorn of the words which are descriptive of the nature of the suit and the proceeding reads as follows; "(c) Every proceeding and every suit and proceeding..... pending before any court or authority whether of the first instance or of appeal, reference or revision shall, on an order being passed in that behalf by the court or authority before whom such suit or proceeding is pending, stand abated". 24. It would thus appear that there is no substance in the contention of the learned counsel that the suit has not been abated and that no order declaring that the suit stands abated need be passed. 25. 24. It would thus appear that there is no substance in the contention of the learned counsel that the suit has not been abated and that no order declaring that the suit stands abated need be passed. 25. It has already been stated earlier in paragraph 21, that the appeal as also the suit have abated. In the circumstances of this case the parties are directed to bear their own costs. C. N. Tiwary, J. I agree. Suit and Appeal abated.