MACHCHAN LAL Vs. UMA SHANKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only point in this Civil Revision is whether the Additional District Judge, Kanpur, could hear the revision under Sec. 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Court Act.

(2.) The plaintiff brought a suit for recovery of Rs. 713-14-0 which was decreed by the Judge Small Cause Court. A revision against that order was filed in the court of the District Judge, Kanpur, who transferred the revision to the court of the Additional District Judge. The Additional District Judge dismissed the revision by an order dated llth Oct. 1958. It is against this order that the present revision has been filed.

(3.) It has been contended by Sri B.R. Avasthi, learned counsel for the applicant, that the Additional District Judge had no jurisdiction to hear and decide the revision because under the amended provisions of Sec. 25 Provincial small Cause Court Act the revision could only be heard by the District Judge. His further contention is that under Sec. 8 of the Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act mere appointment of an Additional District Judge at Kanpur could not confer any jurisdiction on him to hear the revision. What was necessary was that the power to hear revisions should have been assigned to him by the District Judge as required by sub-sec. (2) of that section. This contention of the learned counsel cannot be accepted.