JACOB V J Vs. TOM JOSEPH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Judgment of the Court was delivered by Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. THE defendants in OS No. 131/06 of the Principal Sub Court, Kottayam are the petitioners in this OP, filed invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India. THE subject-matter of that suit was valued at Rs.3,45,500/-. Obviously, going by pecuniary jurisdiction, an appeal against the decree passed by the Trial Court lie only to this Court in terms of the provisions of the Civil Courts Act. However, the petitioners filed an appeal as AS 267/09 before the District Court, Kottayam along with an application for condonation of delay in filing that appeal. THEy also filed certain interlocutory applications to summon witnesses in support of the application for condonation of delay.

(2.) IT appears that the District Court did not notice the defect in the institution of the appeal on a ground referable to the pecuniary jurisdiction. IT proceeded to take up the appeal with the application for condonation of delay and ultimately dismissed that application.

(3.) IN the result, this OP is allowed and the orders impugned herein are vacated. The proceedings in AS 267/09, including the interlocutory applications therein, are declared as null and void. The District Court, Kottayam is directed to reject the appeal memorandum in AS 267/09 and order refund of the entire court fee paid thereon subject to deduction of any due commission. We make this order in preference to the order directing return of the appeal memorandum since RFA 114/11 has already been instituted before this Court against the decree of the Trial Court. The OP is ordered accordingly.