HAR DAYAL SINGH Vs. RAM UJAGAR DUBE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference under Order 46, Rule 1, Civil P. C. , by the Judge, Small Causes, Saharanpur

(2.) THE plaintiff instituted a suit in the Court of the Munsif Saharanpur for the recovery of Rs. 124 as arrears of rent in respect of the accommodation in house No: 86/3 situate at Lucknow. The defendant did not reside at Saharanpur. The suit was instituted in Saharanpur because according to the plaintiff the defendant lessee had agreed to pay rent at the place of the plaintiff's posting. The plaintiff happened to be posted at Saharanpur and therefore he instituted the suit there. The defendant contended that the Saharanpur. Court had no jurisdiction to entertain this suit. The learned Munsif felt doubt on the legal position with respect to the jurisdiction, of the Court and, therefore, made this reference.

(3.) THE suit would be cognisable by a Court at Saharanpur in view of Section 20, Clause (c), Civil p. C. , as part of the cause of action would arise at Saharanpur on account of the lessee-defendant's agreement to pay rent at the place where -the plaintiff happened to be posted at any particular time. The question is whether Section 16, Civil P. C. would cover this suit, and the learned Munsif seems to think that Section 16, Clause (d), may include this suit. Section 16, clause (d) is: