MUHAMMAD KUTTY HAJI Vs. ABDUL RASHEED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Regular First Appeal is preferred, challenging the judgment and decree in O.S No.151 of 2022 on the file of the Sub Court, Manjeri. The Registry of this Court noted a defect, pointing out that since the valuation of the suit, which was filed after 6/5/2013, is Rs.7.5 lakhs (i.e., less than Rs.20.00 lakhs), whether the RFA is maintainable before this Court. The Registry also noted that there is a delay of 12 days in filing the appeal and no application to condone delay is filed. The learned counsel for the appellant answered the defects as follows:

(2.) With regard to the defect relating to pecuniary jurisdiction, the learned counsel for the appellant relied on the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in Deb Kumar Mondal v. Gour Hari Mondal and Ors. [AIR Online 2019 Cal 175] and contended that where two appeals are proposed to be filed from a single judgment and decree, one before the District Court and another before the High Court, in such event, both appeals should be filed before the High Court. The appeals in that case arose from a single judgment on an original claim and a counter claim. Here, there is no counter claim; but the suits were tried jointly and common judgment was passed.

(3.) The proper course open for the appellant is to prefer an appeal against the judgment in O.S. No.151 of 2022 before the District Court and to file appropriate application under Sec. 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for transfer/withdrawal of the appeal to this Court to be heard and disposed of along with R.F.A No.5 of 2026.