Skip to content


Ganga Prasad Vs. Prabhat Dayal - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Reported inAIR1935All141a
AppellantGanga Prasad
RespondentPrabhat Dayal
Excerpt:
- - 3 of the plaint it was stated that after a week the plaintiff had asked the ornaments to be returned but that the defendant 'bad niati se' had not returned the gold and silver. it is merely alleged that in bad faith he did not return the gold and silver......is an application in. civil revision by a defendant against a decree of the small cause court. the plaint alleged that the plaintiff had given gold and silver to the defendant, a sonar, to make into ornaments. in para. 3 of the plaint it was stated that after a week the plaintiff had asked the ornaments to be returned but that the defendant 'bad niati se' had not returned the gold and silver. the lower court held this allegation proved and granted a decree to the plaintiff. the point taken in revision is that the allegations in the plaint amount to an. offence, under ch. 17, penal code, and therefore the suit should have been tried as a regular suit as it is barred from small cause court jurisdiction by the provision in the provincial small cause courts act, schedule 2, article 35(1)(2)......
Judgment:
ORDER

Bennet, J.

1. This is an application in. civil revision by a defendant against a decree of the Small Cause Court. The plaint alleged that the plaintiff had given gold and silver to the defendant, a sonar, to make into ornaments. In para. 3 of the plaint it was stated that after a week the plaintiff had asked the ornaments to be returned but that the defendant 'bad niati se' had not returned the gold and silver. The lower Court held this allegation proved and granted a decree to the plaintiff. The point taken in revision is that the allegations in the plaint amount to an. offence, under Ch. 17, Penal Code, and therefore the suit should have been tried as a regular suit as it is barred from Small Cause Court jurisdiction by the provision in the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, Schedule 2, Article 35(1)(2). Learned Counsel referred to the definition, of 'criminal appropriation' in Section 403, and also 'criminal breach of trust' in Section 405, Penal Code. These definitions involve dishonest misappropriation or conversion, or dishonest use or disposal of the property. It is not alleged in the plaint that the defendant did any of these things. It is merely alleged that in bad faith he did not return the gold and silver. I consider therefore that on the allegations in the plaint the suit is not barred from Small Cause Court jurisdiction. Accordingly I dismiss this application in revision with costs.


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