JUDGMENT Mukerji, J.
1. This is a reference by a learned Munsif under Section 267, Agra Tenancy Act, on the question of jurisdiction to entertain a certain suit. The plaintiff'3 case is as follows : An occupancy holding originally belonged to four brothers, one of whom, now represented by the defendants, separated taking a fourth share in the lands. After this separation there came into existence two holdings "one independent of the other. The holding which was held by the three brothers became the property of the plaintiff's ancestor alone, because two of the brothers died without any issue. Later on, out of the larger holding & bighas were given to the defendants by way of concession with the result that out of the holding the plaintiffs' share is 21 bighas 13 biswas and the defendants' share is 4 bighas 10 biswas. The plaintiffs went to the Revenue Court asking for a partition. There the defendants denied the title of the plaintiffs to the larger amount of the share claimed by the plaintiffs and the Revenue Court directed the plaintiffs to obtain a declaration as to their title. The plaintiffs accordingly asked for a declaration that certain specified plots, together bearing an area of 21 bighas 13 biswas, were the plaintiff's property, while certain other plots together bearing an area of 4 bighas 8 biswas belonged to the defendants, although the total area formed in the Revenue papers only one holding. In the alternative, the plaintiffs asked for a declaration that in the entire holding of 26 bighas odd the plaintiffs' share was 21 bighas and 13 biswas.
2. The learned Munsif was doubtful as to whether the suit could be taken cognizance of by him, and therefore he made the reference. Nobody has appeared on behalf of the defendants in this Court. We are of opinion that the suit is cognizable by the Revenue Court and Revenue Court alone. It is a fact admitted by the plaintiffs that the defendants are co-tenants of the holding. The dispute is about the quantity of share held by each party. Under Section 1?1 a tenant may sue any person claiming through the landholder, that is to say, any person who claims to be a co-tenant, for a declaration of his right as a tenant. The suit in our opinion is covered by Section 121. A suit for division of tenancies under Section 37 is also cognizable by the Revenue Court and the Revenue Court alone : see Schedule 4, group B, serial No, 1. We hold that the suit is cognizable by the Revenue Court and direct the learned Munsif to return the plaint for presentation to the proper Court. The plaintiffs must pay the costs of this reference and the costs incurred by the defendants in the Court below.