RANG NATH Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE VARANASI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A learned single Judge has referred the follow ing question of law for decision by a larger Bench:

(2.) The petitioner is the landlord of a premises which was under the tenancy of the State Government. The petitioner terminated the tenancy and after giving the usual notice under Section 80, C.P.C. filed the present suit for the ejectment of the Government department which was in occupation of the accommodation. The suit was filed in the Small Cause Court. The suit was contested but was decreed by the trial court. The defendant went up in revision. The learned District Judge held that the suit was not cognizable by the Small Cause Court. He, instead of returning the plaint for presentation to the proper court, dismissed it. Hence the present writ petition at the instance of the landlord.

(3.) The learned District Judge held that the Small Cause Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit on the basis of a single Judge decision of this Court in Shyam Manohar Lal v. 4th Addl. District & Sessions Judge (AIR 1978 All 238). In that case a suit was filed, after determination of the tenancy, for the ejectment of the defendant-tenant who was the District Agricultural Officer. The learned single Judge upheld the view that such a suit was not maintainable in the Court of Small Causes under Article 1 of IInd Schedule of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. The IInd Schedule to that Act specifies the categories of suit which are excepted from the jurisdiction of the Small Cause Courts. That Article provides :