Skip to content


Elahi Baksh and anr. Vs. Lala Suraj Narayan - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported inAIR1923All464; 76Ind.Cas.521
AppellantElahi Baksh and anr.
RespondentLala Suraj Narayan
Cases ReferredKesko Das v. Morat Pandey
Excerpt:
jurisdiction of courts - suit in revenue court--question of jurisdiction decided by civil appellate court--appeal--forum. - .....claim of the plaintiff. the opposite party, the plaintiff in the case, went up in appeal to the district judge, contending that the suit was cognizable by the revenue court. the district judge after hearing the appeal accepted the contention of the plaintiff and remanded the case to the assistant collector for trial n the merits. the case was so tried and the claim of the plaintiff was decreed. the defendant who is the applicant before this court, preferred an appeal to the district judge from the decision of the assistant collector. the distract judge returned the memorandum of appeal saying, that the appeal lay to the commissioner. the memorandum of appeal, was thereupon taken and filed in the court of commissioner. when the case came up before the commissioner be was of opinion.....
Judgment:

Rafique, J.

1. It appears that the opposite party sued the applicant for ejectment in the Court of the Assistant Collector. One of the objections taken to the suit was that the Revenue Court had no jurisdiction. The learned Assistant Collector yielded to this plea and rejected the claim of the plaintiff. The opposite party, the plaintiff in the case, went up in appeal to the District Judge, contending that the suit was cognizable by the Revenue Court. The District Judge after hearing the appeal accepted the contention of the plaintiff and remanded the case to the Assistant Collector for trial n the merits. The case was so tried and the claim of the plaintiff was decreed. The defendant who is the applicant before this Court, preferred an appeal to the District Judge from the decision of the Assistant Collector. The Distract Judge returned the Memorandum of Appeal saying, that the appeal lay to the Commissioner. The Memorandum of Appeal, was thereupon taken and filed in the Court of Commissioner. When the case came up before the Commissioner be was of opinion that be had no jurisdiction and that the appeal should be heard and tried by the District Judge. The applicant has now filed the present applicantion complaining against the order of the District Judge refining his Memorandum of Appeal for presentation to the Commissioner. There can be no doubt as to the jurisdiction of trie Court which had to entertain the appeal of the applicant. Once the question of jurisdiction raving been raised and the case laving come up to the District Judge for disposal of that quest the appeal lay to him after the case had been disposed of on the merits. The case of Kesko Das v. Morat Pandey 23 Ind. Cas. 320 : 12 A.L.J. 367 is in point. I, therefore, allow the application, set aside the order of the District Judge returning the Memorandum of Appeal to the applieant for presentation to the Commissioner's Court and direct teat the appeal be admitted by the District Judge and disposed of according to law. The costs of this plication will abide the result.


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