Tarsem Lal vs State of Punjab and others

B.S. Yadav, J.—The brief facts leading to this revision are that present Petitioner Tarsem Lal bad filed a suit for a declaration that he was entitled to recover the amounts mentioned in the plaint At that time he was posted at Bhatinda Some amount claimed was said to be arrears of pay etc. for the period he was posted at Bhatinda. The learned trial Court at Bhatinda vide order dated 24th November, 1975 held that as the arrears of salary etc. for the period the Plaintiff was posted at Bhatinda had been paid and the rest of the claim related to the period when he was posted at Moga, therefore, no cause of action accrued to him within the territorial limits of that Court. Accordingly, it was ordered that the plaint be returned to the Plaintiff for presentation to the proper Court. Feeling aggrieyed against that order, the Plaintiff filed an appeal which was heard by learned Additional District Judge, Bhatinda. He held that no part of the existing cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of Bhatinda Civil Courts Accordingly, the decision of the trial Court was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed on 24th April, 1978.

The Plaintiff filed an application before the learned Additional District Judge, Bhatinds, for review of his order. He, vide detailed order dated 19th May, 1980 held that some mistake had occurred while passing the judgment dated 24th April, 1978 and held that part of the cause of action had accrued in Bhatinda. In view of that finding, he allowed the review application and adjourned the case by remarking that the judgment and decree previously passed were to be reviewed in view of the facts brought on the file. It appears that thereafter Sh Gurjit Singh Sandhu who had passed that order, was transferred and he was succeeded by Sh. N. S. Bhatia. He again held that no amount remained to be paid to the Plaintiff for the period he was posted in Bhatinda. Accordingly, he dismissed the appeal. Feeling aggrieved against that order, the Plaintiff has come to this Court In revision.

I am of the opinion that the order passed by Sh N. S. Bhatia is without jurisdiction. His predecessor had already allowed the review application filed by the Plaintiff and bad categorically held that part of cause of action had arisen to the Plaintiff at Bhatinda. Sh. Bhatia was only to pass formal order about setting aside the earlier order and remandin the case to trial Court for further proceedings after accepting the appeal Sh N. S Bhatia could not review the order pasted on merits by his predecessor. The Defendants had not filed any appeal or revision against the order by which review application was allowed. Thus it had become final.

For the foregoing reasons I accept the present appeal and set aside the impugned order passed by Sh N. S. Bhatia. The proper course for me would have been to send back the case to the learned lower Appellate Court for passing the proper order in the light of the order dated 19th May, 1980 passed by Sh Gurjit Singh Sandhu. However, it would cause unnecessary delay in the disposal of the case which has already become very old. The Plaintiff will also have to incur unnecessary expenses by engaging counsel in the learned lower Appellate Court. Therefore, I remand the suit to the learned trial Court for disposal in accordance with law. That Court will register the case at its orginal number and dispose it of expeditiously. The Appellant has been directed to appear before the learned trial Court.