K.B. Asthana, C.J.
1. Salik Chand presented a plaint in the court of the second Civil Judge, Meerut at Ghaziabad, alleging inter alia that the defendant Mohan Lal was his tenant and had defaulted in payment of rent. The relief claimed in the plaint was that the defendant be ejected and a decree be passed for recovery of arrears of rent and damages. Many other suits of similar nature were presented by other landlords. These suits were not registered as the Munsarim reported that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suits on the small cause court side. The learned Second Civil Judge, by his order dated 18-4-1975accepted the objection and held that the suits were not entertainable by him. When this order was brought to the notice of the Chief Justice in Chambers by a delegation of Advocates from Ghaziabad, who also presented before him a certified copy of the said order of the Second Civil Judge, the Chief Justice suo motu entertained the revision and sent for the record of the leading suit of Salik Chand v. Mohan Lal. The Chief Justice also directed notice to issue to the plaintiff and defendant of the suit fixing 12th May, 1975 for hearing. The Chief Justice further directed that the case be listed before a Division Bench considering the importance of the matter. This is how the case is listed before us today. Sri G. C. Dwi-vedi appeared before us for Salik Chand, the plaintiff, and Sri D. P. Garg for defendant Mohan Lal. We sent for the previous notifications on the subject and requested the Registrar of the Court to assist us.
2. The learned Second Civil Judge seems to be of the view that inasmuch as there is a small cause court in the district of Meerut, no court in Ghaziabad can entertain a suit of small cause court nature and exercise power,1-; of small cause court under notification No. 526 dated 25th October, 1972. He seems to be further of the view that under notification dated 29th March, 1973 the suits ought to be filed before the court of the small causes at Meerut and then the District Judge could transfer them for trial and hearing to his court in Ghaziabad and, therefore, he returned the plaints to be presented before the proper court, presumably the court of the small causes at Meerut.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also been benefited by the assistance rendered by the Registrar of the Court. The learned counsel for the parties have canvassed for the view that the Second Civil Judge at Ghaziabad has jurisdiction to exercise powers of a small cause court under notification No. 526, dated 25-10-1972 and any reference to the latter notification No. 156 dated 29th March, 1973 would be irrelevant. Under Section 25 of the Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act, 1887. the High Court as delegate of the State Government by notifications in the Gazette from time to time has been conferring the jurisdiction of a Judge of a court of small causes on Civil Judge and Munsifs. We find that some times by name the powers have been conferred on the Munsifs and the Civil Judges under Section 25 of the Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act. It is not clear before us whether any such power was conferred on Sri O. P. Jain, Second Civil Judge,Ghaziabad by name. It may be mentioned that the proviso to Section 25 permits the delegation of the power of the State Government under that section to the High Court and it is the High Court which has been issuing the necessary notifications as the delegate of the State Government.
4. Section 16 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 lays down:
'16. Save as expressly provided by this Act or by any other enactment for the time being in force, a suit cognizable by a Court of Small Causes shall not be tried by any other Court having jurisdiction within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court of small causes by which the suit is triable.'
It is clear from this section that in an area or territory over which a Court of Small Causes has jurisdiction, no other court can exercise jurisdiction in suits of Small Cause Courts nature. The emphasis is on the 'local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court of Small Causes' constituted for any particular area or territory. It follows therefrom that if the territory of a revenue district is carved out into different areas Tahsilwise or otherwise and a Small Cause Court is constituted to exercise jurisdiction over some of the Tehsils or areas so carved out then for the remaining areas or Tehsils of that district there is no Small Causes Court exercising jurisdiction. Bearing this in mind and in the background of the scheme under Section 16 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, we have to construe and interpret notification No. 526 dated 25-10-1972 issued by the High Court in exercise of the powers under Section 25 of the Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act, 1887. There cannot be any objection to the conferment of power under this section in a general manner on courts constituted. There is nothing in the section which compels the High Court, as delegate of the State Government, to confer powers by name or by particularising an officer. The material part of notification No. 526 dated 25-10-1972 reads:--
'In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act, 1887 (Act XII of 1887) as amended by the Uttar Pradesh Civil Laws Amendment Act, 1972 (U.P. Act No. 37 of 1972), delegated by the State Government under Sub-section (3) of the said Section 25 to the High Court, and in supersession of all similar notifications issued in this behalf, the High Court is pleased to confer, with immediate effect, upon all the Civil Judges and Munsifs, while posted in a district where there is no court of Small Causes, the jurisdiction of a Judge of a court of Small Causes under the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, 1887 (ActIX of 1887) for the trial of suits up to thevalue specified below:--
... ... ...'
An apparent reading of the material words of the notification quoted above certainly gives an impression that if in any district there is a Small Cause Court then the power of Small Cause Courts cannot be conferred on Civil Judges and Munsifs posted in that district but on a deeper consideration it would appear that the real intent and purpose of the said notification was that for those areas or Tehsils in a district over which no Small Cause Court exercises jurisdiction, a Civil Judge or Munsif can be invested with powers of Small Causes Courts for such area or Tehsils, that is to say that the words 'a District where there is no Court of Small Causes' occurring in the notification ought to be read as 'a district where there is no Court of Small Causes exercising jurisdiction'. We think that on all settled rules of interpretation the Court can always in order to effectuate the purpose even supply words which do not in any way defeat the object for which the measure w,as undertaken. It was suggested at one stage at the bar that since the High Court itself had power it can issue another notification by way of clarification. We do not think that it is necessary to do so when the notification as it exists can be interpreted and construed in the manner indicated above.
5. Serial No. 48 of the Schedule appended to the Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act, 1887 shows that the Small Cause Court Judge sitting at Meerut exercises jurisdiction over four Tehsils of Meerut district namely, Meerut, Mowana, Sardhana and Hapur. The Tehsils of Ghaziabad and Bagpat, which are the component of the revenue district of Meerut, have been excluded. The Small Cause Court Judge sitting at Meerut thus does not exercise jurisdiction in the areas covered by the Tehsil of Ghaziabad. We have no hesitation in holding that though there is a Small Cause Court Judge sitting at the headquarter at Meerut, he does not exercise any jurisdiction as a Small Cause Court Judge in the area of Ghaziabad Tehsil. There is no escape from the conclusion then that within the meaning of notification No. 526 dated 25-10-1972 issued by the High Court there is no Small Cause Court in the district exercising jurisdiction over the cases .arising out of the areas covered by the Tehsil of Ghaziabad. Under the said notification, therefore, the Second Civil Judge of Ghaziabad who is a Civil Judge has jurisdiction to exercise the powers of a Small Cause Court Judge in the area covered by the Tehsil of Ghaziabad. Thus the plaints presented by Salik Chand andmany other plaintiffs were entertainable in the court of the Second Civil Judge of Ghaziabad who exercises the powers of Small Cause Court in the said area.
6. This revision is allowed and the order of the learned Second Civil Judge dated 18-4-1975 is set aside. He is directed to entertain all the plaints covered by the said order and register them in accordance with the rules. There would be no order as to costs.