PRAFULLE ANANT GAWDE Vs. MADHUKATR A KARNADE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides at length.

(2.) THE City Civil Court, Bombay order, dated 11-2-1993 ordered return of the plaint to the Appropriate Court i. e. Small Causes Court, Bombay in view of Section 41 of the Presidency Small Cause Court, Act 1882 (herein after referred to as "small Cause Courts Act' ). The Court below has held that it will have no jurisdiction to decide the suit in view of Section 41 (1 ). The said order is under challenge in this Appeal.

(3.) A few facts necessary to appreciate the contentions are as follows 5 the Appellant herein filed suit alleging that the Respondent was carrying on business in the suit premises of commercial photography. The Appellant was looking out for some premises for carrying on business of commercial photography. The Appellant met Respondent and Respondent agreed to hand over the possession of the suit premises to the appellant. The appellant approved the premises and the Respondent removed his articles. The Appellant thereafter brought his articles and started the business in the name of M/s. Studio Prisma. The Appellant agreed to pay consideration or monthly compensation to the Respondent. Initially the monthly compensation fixed was less, but it came to be increased to Rs. 5,000 per month and Appellant was paying the same regularly. It was further averred that the Appellant was put in possession exclusively in 1987 of the suit premises, and the Appellant was conducting his business activities. On 6-11-1992 he was threatened and was asked by the Respondent to vacate the suit premises This threat was repeated and therefore the Appellant apprehended that ho would be dispossessed by the Respondent forcibly. Hence the Appellant prayed for permanent injunction against the Respondent from dispossessing him from the suit premises and also obstructing his exclusive occupation and possession of the suit premises. The Appellant took out the Notice of motion for ad-interim and interim reliefs. When the said Notice of motion was taken up for hearing, preliminary objection regarding jurisdiction was raised in view of Section 9-A of Civil Procedure code by the Respondent and which came to be answered in favour of the Respondent as mentioned above.