BOPPANA VENKATAKRISHNAIAH Vs. GADDE MADHAVA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that arises in this revision petition is whether the jurisdiction of the Court of the District Munsif to entertain a suit which is cognizable by a Village Court under section 13 of the Village Courts Act, is excluded.

(2.) There is no dispute that the claim in this case is cognizable by the Village Court. It is now well settled that ouster of jurisdiction of a Civil Court must be either express or clearly implied and must not be readily inferred. This fundamental rule is founded on the theory that Civil Courts are Courts of general jurisdiction and the litigant public have a right, unless expressly or impliedly barred, to insist to resort to the Courts of general jurisdiction of the State. A scrutiny of the relevant statutory provisions in the Village Courts Act, 1888, renders it radiantly clear that the jurisdiction of the Village Courts is not exclusive but concurrent with that of the District Munsif. Section 13 enunciates that the Village Courts can take cognizance of suits for money due on contract or for personal property when the debt or demand does not exceed Rs, 50. Then the next relevant section is 20-A. It would be profitable to read it: "20-A. (1) If a suit which is triable by a Village Court is instituted in the Court of a District Munsif, he may, unless sufficient reasons exist to the contrary transfer it to the Village Court. (2) Where a District Munsif tries a suit which is triable by a Village Court and is of opinion that the suit ought to have been instituted in the Village Court, no costs shall be allowed to a successful plaintiff and a successful defendant shall be allowed his costs as between pleader and client."

(3.) The expression in the section is unambiguous and requires no amplification. The section far from indicating any exclusion of jurisdiction recognises and retains the general jurisdiction of the District Munsif to try the classes of cases which can be taken cognizance of by the Village Courts. It is, however, open to the District Munsif to transfer any such case to the concerned Village Court. The only condition imposed in section 20-A (2) is that if a District Munsif tries a suit which is triable by a Village Court and he is of the opinion that the suit ought to have been instituted in the Village Court, no costs shall be allowed to a successful plaintiff. Thus there is absolutely no express or implied bar for the District Munsif to entertain a suit which is cognizable by a Village Court under section 13 of the Village Courts Act. The jurisdiction of the Village Courts and the District Munsif is concurrent and the suitor has the choice to choose the forum. If a decision which is in complete accord with the view expressed by me is required, one is found in Sanjamma v. Sayanna. The revision petition must, therefore, fail and it is accordingly dismissed with costs. Revision dismissed.