Sections 2 (8), 33 and 44 of the settlements were sought from the houses in the enclave population, where the houses in question were not located in the land which was given to the tenants for rent or under tenancy. Were in possession of. Located in a rural area, such land cannot be declared part and parcel of tenancy, which gave the Revenue Court jurisdiction to initiate eviction proceedings under the Balochistan Tenancy Ordinance, 1978, in the present case. With the consent of the parties, the case was sent to the verdict. The Revenue Court could not have obtained the jurisdiction of the Revenue Court with such consent, in view of the acknowledged position that it had no jurisdiction in the matter that the under-lying buildings were located in a village situated on the site of the occupied building. There was no place. For agricultural purposes letting a tenant land when the court has jurisdiction, no amount of consent or settlement in the proceedings can be invested with this court. Estoppel's jurisdiction and principle was not attracted to the principles in such circumstances
