KAILASH CHANDRA GUPTA Vs. SUBHASH CHANDRA GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the contesting respondent.

(2.) THE instant writ petition has been filed against the judgment and orders dated 23.4.2002, passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court, and 3.2.2005, passed by the Additional District Judge/Special Judge (Economic Offences), Allahabad.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has laid emphasis that the Judge, Small Causes Court wrongly returned the plaint, as the respondent is a tenant since a very long time and relationship of landlord and tenant existed between them. Assuming that there was some title dispute even then in view of the principles laid down by this Court in the case of Smt. Munni Devi and others v. Xth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Agra and others, AIR 1990 All 169, the Judge, Small Cause has jurisdiction to decide the question of title incidentally involved in a suit for eviction. Section 23 of the Small Causes Court Act, does not make it obligatory on the Court to return the plaint once a question of title is raised by the tenant in such a suit.