MADRAS CINE SERVICE BY SOLE PROPRIETOR T.S. LAKSHMI Vs. SHYAMALA PICTURES PRIVATE LTD. BY MANAGING DIRECTOR AR.M.AN. ANNAMALAI CHETTIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question involved in this civil revision petition is of some -importance as it deals with the powers of the new trial Bench of the Court of small causes in presidency towns under Section 38 of the presidency Small Cause Court Act, 1882. The relevant facts are as follows:

(2.) THE respondent (plaintiff) instituted a suit for recovery of moneys being the hire charges of a camera, on the foot of an agreement Exhibit P -1 executed by the petitioner (defendant) on 29th September, 1963. The plea of the petitioner was that the agreement is vitiated by undue influence and coercion and therefore unenforceable The trial Court dismissed the suit, being of the view that Exhibit P -1 was taken under coercion and undue influence. The new trial Bench how ever, reversed the decision of the trial Court and decreed the suit as prayed for The question is whether the Full Bench of the Court of Small Causes could, the decision of the trial Court, and if it did desire to so reverse and find a fact in a manner otherwise than that found by the trial Court, whether it could dispose it of by itself.

(3.) IT is not necessary for purposes of this petition, to traverse any more into the oral or documentary evidence adduced in this case. It is no doubt true that Courts presided over by Judges who are necessarily human can weigh the pros and cons of the evidence before them and come to conclusions different from that arrived by the Courts subordinate to them. But this general rule has some exceptions when considered in the light of the jurisdiction conferred upon them by status. Under Section 37 of the presidency small cause Courts Act, 1882, it is provided. Save as otherwise provided by this Chapter (Chapter VI) or by any other enactment for the time being in force, every decree and order of the Small Cause Court in a suit shall be final and conclusive.