J K SHARMA Vs. K S RAMACHANDRA SETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant filed original suit 59 of 1963 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Bangalore against the respondent for recovery of Rs. 13,234 -20nP, said to be due on dishonoured cheques. He purported to present the plaint under Rule 2 of Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure and claimed the benefit of the summary procedure provided under the said order. According to Rule 1 of the order, it applies only to (1) the High Courts of Calcutta, Madras and Bombay, (2) any District Court and (3) any other Court specially empowered in that behalf by the State Government. The defendant -respondent raised the objection that the Civil Judge's Court was not a Court specially empowered as aforesaid. The plaintiff appellant, after taking some adjournments to produce the necessary or relevant notification of the State Government, failed to produce any such notifications. Hence the Civil Judge taking the view that his Court had no jurisdiction to entertain such summary suits in the absence of special authorisation by the State Government, returned the plaint for presentation to proper Court by his order dated 3 -3 -1964.

(2.) THE principal argument on behalf of the appellant is that Section 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure can be pressed against him only if his suit is one which the Civil Judge's Court is competent to try, that because Order XXXVII does not apply to that Court, his suit in respect of which he can claim the benefit of Order XXXVII by virtue of sub -rule(1) of Rule 2 thereof is not one which the Civil Judge's Court is competent to try and that therefore the order of the District Judge is wrong. Rule 2(1) of Order XXXVII reads:

(3.) NOW , in the absence of any considerations arising out of Order XXXVII alter the nature of the suit or affect the normal jurisdiction which Courts possess under the other provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. The incidental question raised by or arising out to the arguments on behalf of the appellant is whether the choice given to a plaintiff under sub -rule(1) of Rule 2 of Order XXXVII is a choice between two modes of procedure or between two Courts.