R.P. OCONNOR Vs. P.G. SAMPATH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant filed a suit on the original side of this court for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 6720 alleged to be due on a promissory note executed by the defendant in favour of his mother. The defendant pleaded 'inter alia' that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit as the defendant was a permanent resident of Bangalore and the promissory note and the endorsements thereon were made outside the limits of the original jurisdiction of this court. Thereupon, the applicant took out an application praying that the plaint which he had filed should be returned to him. In the affidavit filed by him in support of the application he stated that in order to enable him to pursue his remedies it is necessary that an order should be made directing the return of the plaint to him and this court had jurisdiction to return the plaint for presentation to the proper court once it found it had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The application came on before Panchapakesa Ayyar J. who heard counsel on both sides and directed the papers to be placed before me for constituting a Full Bench to consider this point. I have however thought it was unnecessary to constitute a Full Bench because there was no conflict of decisions of Division Benches in our Court.

(2.) THE question for decision as framed by Panchapakesa Ayyar J. is as follows :

(3.) THERE is very little or direct authority on this question. The only decision in which it is specifically discussed is that in 'Bhaiyat v. L. Chong Kha',, AIR 1934 Rang 342 (A) in which Leach J. as he then was, held that although Order 7, Rule 10, Civil P. C. does not apply to the High Court3 it may by reason of its inherent powers direct that the plaint shall be returned to the plaintiff so that he may file it in the proper court if it finds that it has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The learned Judge based his decision chiefly on the fact that it would be unjust to require a suitor, who has filed a suit in a court in the belief that he would obtain from it an adjudication on his claim but could not do so because the court had no jurisdiction, to pay another court -fee in the circumstances. He relied upon the observations of West J. in 'Prabhakarbhat v. Vishwambhar',, 8 Bom 313 (FB). That learned Judge said :