MUNSHI KHAN Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE, GHAZIABAD AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and also perused the record. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the judgment and order dated 29.1.1988 whereby the trial court directed the plaint to be returned for presentation before a competent Court and the order dated 14.9.2000 whereby the revisional Court has dismissed the revision filed against the order passed by the trial Court.

(2.) IT appears that the petitioner filed a suit for ejectment and recovery of rent on the ground of default against respondents No. 3 and 4. On receipt of the notice from the trial court the contesting respondents No. 3 and 4 filed written statement pleading that originally one Rafiq Ahmad was owner of the property in dispute who sold the same on 28.11.1979 in favour of Ali Hasan and another, sons of the respondents. Plaintiff had no concern whatsoever with the property in dispute. It was also pleaded that since a serious question of title was involved in the case, therefore, Judge Small Causes Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit and the plaint was liable to be returned for presentation before a court of competent jurisdiction. The trial court after hearing the parties and perusing the material on record upheld the objection raised by the contesting respondents and directed the plaint to be returned for presentation before a court of competent jurisdiction by judgment and order dated 29.1.1988, as, according to the findings recorded by the trial court, serious question of title was involved, which could not be decided by the Judge Small Causes Court. Challenging the validity of the said order the petitioner filed revision before the revisional Court. The revisional Court also upheld the findings recorded by the trial court and dismissed the revision by its judgment and order dated 14.9.2000. Hence the present petition.

(3.) I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and also perused the record.