DEBI SAHAI Vs. GANGA SAHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of a sum of money as the price of a tree which was alleged to have belonged to the plaintiffs and which had been taken away by the defendant-appellant with the intention of committing theft. The suit was filed in the Court of the Munsif. The price of the tree as fixed by the plaintiffs was Rs. 100/- only. The defendant objected that the suit was cognizable by the Panchayati Adalat under the U. P. Panchayat Raj act. Thereupon the plaintiffs-respondents made an application for amendment of the plaint saying that the valuation of the tree was Rs. 110/- and an amendment may be made accordingly in the plaint. This application was contested by the defendant-appellant, and it was rejected by the Munsif. After the rejection of the application, the plaint was bound to be returned to the plaintiffs for presentation to the proper Court, and it was so returned.

(2.) AFTER the plaint was returned to the plaintiffs-respondents, they themselves amended the valuation, of the suit in the original plaint by altering the figure of Rs. 100/- into Rs. 110/- and represented it to the Munsif. The plaint was registered as a suit. It is not clear whether the defendant raised the plea that the suit was not triable by the Munsif because it was triable by the panchayati Adalat. There was an issue, however, whether the suit was triable by the Munsif; and the judgment merely says that the issue had been decided in the affirmative on a previous date. We will, however, assume that the issue was raised as to whether that suit was not cognizable by the trial Court because it was triable by the Pancha yati Adalat.

(3.) THE suit was decreed by the Munsif, and the plaintiffs were held entitled to Rs. 80/- from the defendant. The defendant appealed to the lower appellate court and raised two points before that court. First, whether after the abolition of the zamindari the plaintiffs had any interest left in the tree, and second, whether the trial Court had any jurisdiction to try the suit. The Court below decided both the points against the defendant, and dismissed the appeal. Against this decree the defendant has come up in appeal to this Court, and the only point raised before me is whether the munsif had jurisdiction to entertain the suit.