Skip to content


Abdul Hamid Khan Vs. Babu Lal and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1913)ILR35All156; 18Ind.Cas.282
AppellantAbdul Hamid Khan
RespondentBabu Lal and ors.
Excerpt:
act no. x of 1897 (general clauses act), section 3(25) - act no. ix of 1887 (provincial small cause courts act), schedule ii, article 13--court of small causes--jurisdiction--ferry--'immovable property'--suit to recover tolls alleged to be due to plaintiff as lessee of a ferry. - - in my opinion the order of the court below is perfectly right......toll of rs. 8 per boat. the suit was instituted in the court of small causes at allahabad, and the judge of that court has held that he had no jurisdiction, as the suit is one which falls under article 13 of the second schedule to the provincial small cause courts act. the plaintiff comes here in revision and urges that the suit is cognizable by the court below. article 13 contemplates a suit to enforce payment of dues when such dues are payable to a person by reason of his interest in immovable property and the question is whether the plaintiff by reason of his lease of the ferry has an interest in immovable property. the point was considered in two cases, namely, gokal chand v. lal chand punj. rec., 1897, c.j., 215 and desa singh v. narain das punj rec., 1898, c.j., 278. the right to.....
Judgment:

Tudball, J.

1. This is an application in revision against the order of the Judge of the Small Cause Court at Allahabad. The plaintiff, who is the applicant here, is a lessee of a ferry from the Cantonment Committee of Allahabad. The defendants are fishermen, who, according to the plaintiff, are landing their fish on the river bank where his ferry is situate. He claims that as lessee of the ferry he is entitled to a fixed toll of Rs. 8 per boat. The suit was instituted in the Court of Small Causes at Allahabad, and the Judge of that court has held that he had no jurisdiction, as the suit is one which falls under Article 13 of the second schedule to the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. The plaintiff comes here in revision and urges that the suit is cognizable by the court below. Article 13 contemplates a suit to enforce payment of dues when such dues are payable to a person by reason of his interest in immovable property and the question is whether the plaintiff by reason of his lease of the ferry has an interest in immovable property. The point was considered in two cases, namely, Gokal Chand v. Lal Chand Punj. Rec., 1897, C.J., 215 and Desa Singh v. Narain Das Punj Rec., 1898, C.J., 278. The right to a ferry no doubt is a benefit which arises out of land and comes within the definition of immovable property under Section 3(25) of the General Clauses Act. I fully agree with the two above mentioned rulings. In my opinion the order of the court below is perfectly right. I dismiss the application. The costs of this application will abide the result and will be costs in the cause.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //