THIMMALA KISHTA REDDY Vs. SIRPURAM HANMAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant is the petitioner before me. A suit bearing OS No. 29 of 1976 was filed in the Court of the District Munsif of Chennoor on the basis of a pronote for a sum of Rs. 1,132-50 ps. This suit was instituted on 1-12-1976.

(2.) The trial Court, after putting the parties to trial, dismissed the suit. The plaintiff preferred an appeal which was allowed and the suit was decreed. Aggrieved by that decree, the defendant has preferred this revision.

(3.) Mr. Avva Satyanarayana Rao, learned advocate for the petitioner, contends that the suit was filed on the small cause side it might be that it was numbered as a Original suit but in fact it was filed on the small cause side; and therefore having regard to the provisions of the Hyderabad Small Cause Courts Act, 1330 Fasli a revision should have been filed against the dismissal of the suit by the trial Court and since the plaintiff has preferred an appeal, the lower appellate Court had no jurisdiction to dispose of the same. Therefore, the decree passed in the suit is illegal on the ground that the appellate Court had no jurisdiction. In support of this contention, Mr. Avva Satyanarayana Rao has brought to my notice two decisions of the Madras High Court in Kollipara Seetapathy v. Kannipati Subbayya 1910 I.L.R. Vol. XXXIII Mad. 323 and Ramaswamy Chettiar v. R.G. ORR and Others, 1903 ILR Vol. XXVI Mad. 176