ANJANABAI HANUMANTRAO SONAWANE Vs. HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether this Court should hear and dispose of this suit or the suit has to be tried by the Court of Small Causes, Mumbai is the issue. It is the case of the defendant that this Court does not have jurisdiction in view of Section 41 of the Presidency Small Causes Court Act 1882 (for brevity referred as 'the said Act') and therefore, the plaint has to be returned to the plaintiffs under Order VII Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and to be presented to the appropriate forum, viz., the Court of Small Causes at Bombay.

(2.) The plaintiffs have filed an affidavit in reply opposing the chamber summons whereby the stand is that the present suit is not between the lessees/landlord/tenants and therefore, this Court has jurisdiction.

(3.) The case of the defendant, in short however, is that, the plaint as it reads clearly shows that the dispute raised by the plaintiffs is for possession of the suit property and that the plaintiffs' wish to be declared as lessees of the suit property. Hence, the plaintiffs claim to be a tenant, the issue is a dispute between the land-lord and the tenant for possession and therefore this Court has no jurisdiction. This being a short point, before we proceed further, let us examine what the plaint states. It should also be kept in mind that while deciding the jurisdiction of the Court at this stage, we need to look into only the averments in the plaint taking them to be true. The admitted position in the plaint is that the defendant is the owner of the suit property.