Brahma Deo Narain Rai vs Ist Addl. District Judge

Yatindra Singh, J.—The petitioner filed a suit for eviction of Respondent No. 2 (the contesting respondent) on the allegation that they are the landlords of the premises in dispute and he was a tenant at the rate of Rs. 50 per month. This suit was filed before the Civil Court. The contesting respondent took an objection that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction and the case should be tried by the Judge Small Causes Court (JSCC), Civil Court by the order dated 2481999 returned the plaint for presentation before the JSCC. The contesting respondent took objection before JSCC that plaint should be returned under Section 23 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act (the Act) to be tried before the Civil Court. This application was rejected on 2231998. The contesting respondent filed a revision which was dismissed on 1281980. No further proceedings were taken by the contesting respondent against this order. Subsequently, the suit was decreed by the JSCC on 22111981. The contesting respondent filed and a revision that was allowed on 3131982 on the ground that plaint ought to have been returned under Section 23 of the Act to be tried before the Civil Court. Hence the present writ petition.

I have heard Sri Rakesh Pandey, Counsel for the petitioner and Sri L.N. Pandey for the contesting respondent. The contesting respondent initially took up a plea before the Civil Court that it is a case between landlord and the tenant and should be tried before the JSCC. Subsequently, on his objection the plaint was returned and the suit was tried before the JSCC which recorded the finding of fact that the respondent was a tenant and the petitioner was landlord of the premises in dispute. The contesting respondent does not claim that the property belongs to him. According to him this property has fallen in the share of someone else and as such suit is not maintainable before the JSCC. The trial Court recorded a finding that there was relationship of landlord and tenant between parties. This finding has neither been set aside nor Revisional Court has jurisdiction to set it aside. In view of this plaint could not be ordered to be returned for presentation before the Civil Court. The order passed by the Revisional Court dated 3131982 is illegal and is quashed and the order of JSCC decreeing the suit dated 1221981 is upheld.

With these observations the writ petition is allowed.