JITENDRA KAUR Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE, BAREILLY AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. Heard Sri A.K. Goyal, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Prakash Padia appearing for respondents No. 2 and 3.

(2.) The first submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that since the suit was valued at more than Rs. 20 Lac as such the appeal filed under Order XLIII, Rule 1(r) was not maintainable before the District Judge as per the valuation of the suit and the order passed is without jurisdiction.

(3.) In reply, it has been submitted by Sri Prakash Padia, learned Counsel for the Indian Oil Corporation that since the formal order prepared by the Trial Court indicated the valuation to be Rs. 2.06 Lac as such the appeal was filed before the District Judge. It has further been pointed out that in the valuation clause of the plaint, the plaintiff-petitioner herself though valued the suit in figures at Rs. 2.06 Lac but in words Rs. Twenty Lac Six Thousand was mentioned. An application seeking amendment in the plaint has been moved and is pending before the Trial Court.