NARAYAN NATHUJI Vs. BRIJMOHAN HARIDAS AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first appeal has been placed before us for a decision of the preliminary objection regarding its tenability in this Court as directed by Mr. Justice Abhyankar.

(2.) The respondent No. 1 Brijmohan filed Civil Suit No. 3-B of 1955 on 17-1-1955 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Class I, Khamgaon, for recovery of Rs. 7,600 on account of the price of a motor truck, alleged to have been sold by him to the defendant-appellant. On the date of filing the suit, the Central Provinces and Berar Courts Act, 1917 (Act No. I of 1917), was in force in this area. Under section 17 of that Act, the Courts of Civil Judges, Class II, were given jurisdiction to hear and determine suits or original proceedings of a value not exceeding Rs. 5,000 and the Courts of Civil Judges, Class I, were given jurisdiction to hear and determine suits or original proceedings of a value not exceeding Rs 10,000. Under section 20 of that Act, an appeal from the decree or order of a Civil Judge, Class I, lay to the District Court if the value of the subject-matter in the suit did not exceed Rs. 5,000, and to the High Court if the value exceeded Rs. 5,000. In 1956, an Amending Act called the Madhya Pradesh Courts (Amendment) Act, 1956 (Act No. 2 of 1956), was passed and it came into force on the 1st of July 1956. This Amending Act abolished the distinction between Civil Judges of the First Class and Civil Judges of the Second Class and extended the jurisdiction of the Civil Judges to cases involving subject-matter valued upto Rs. 10,000. Sec. 7 of this Amending Act amended section 20 of the Act of 1917 by providing that an appeal from the decree or order of the Court of a Civil Judge shall lie to the District Court, and an appeal from the decree or order of an additional Judge of the District Court shall lie to the District Court if the value of the subject-matter of the suit does not exceed Rs. 10,000 and shall lie to the High Court if it exceeds Rs. 10,000. The suit of the plaintiff-respondent was decreed against both the defendants on the 25th of Sept. 1956 after the aforesaid Amending Act No. 2 of 1956 had come into force on 1st July 1956. In accordance with the provisions of the C.P. and Berar Courts Act of 1917, which were in force at the time when the suit was filed in the Court of the Civil Judge, Class I, Khamgaon, the present appeal was filed in this Court. When it came on for hearing before Mr. Justice Abhyankar, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1, raised a preliminary objection to the tenability of this appeal in this Court.

(3.) It was urged before Mr. Justice Abhyankar that in view of the Amending Act, the appeal would lie before the District Court and not before this Court. In the course of arguments, the learned Advocate for the respondent No. 1 had submitted that, though another single Judge had overruled a similar objection, in First Appeal No. 137 of 1957, decided on 12-12-1962, a Division Bench of this Court had taken a contrary view in First Appeal No. 90 of 1958 wherein the memorandum of appeal was returned for presentation to the proper Court, namely, the District Court, on 11-8-1958. The transcript of the judgment by Mr. Justice Chandrachud in First Appeal No. 137 of 1957 was not available at the time when the matter had come up for hearing before Mr. Justice Abhyankar on the 17th of Dec. 1962. Mr. Justice Abhyankar directed that the matter should be placed before a Division Bench on making the following observations: