SUNDAR DAS Vs. LACHMAN DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision arises out of proceedings under the Displaced Persons Debts Adjustment Act 70 of 1951. When this revision, cattle up for hearing, a question first arose as to whether such a revision did at all He to this Court under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The jurisdiction to deal with proceedings under that Act 70 of 1951 is vested in Tribunal and not in Civil Courts. Under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the High Court can call for the record of any case which has been decided by any court subordinate to such a High Court. Section 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure lays down what courts are courts subordinate to the High Court for the purposes of the Code of Civil Procedure. That section is to the following effect:- "For the purposes of this Code, the District Court is subordinate to the High Court, and every Civil Court of a grade inferior to that of a District Court and every Court of Small Causes is subordinate to the High Court and District Court."

(2.) A Tribunal exercising powers under Act, 70 of 1951 is neither a district court nor a civil court or a court of small causes. Consequently, such a Tribunal is not a court subordinate to the High Court for the purposes of the Code of Civil Procedure. The only courts which are subordinate to the High Court for the purposes of the Code of Civil Procedure are those enumerated in Section 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure and may be such, other courts as may have been made subordinate to the High Court for the purposes of the Code of Civil Procedure by any other enactment.

(3.) Act 70 of 1951 does not specifically lay down that a Tribunal seized of proceedings under that Act is to be a court subordinate to the High Court for the purposes of the Code of Civil Procedure.