RAMCHANDRA YADAV Vs. BHAGIRATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Applicant-defendant has directed this Revision against the order dated 31/10/2000 passed by IVth Civil Judge, Class-II, Ujjain in Civil Suit No. 23A/2000 thereby decline to record 'findings with regard to jurisdiction on the application filed on behalf of the appellant under Order 7, Rules 10 and 11 read with Section 8 of the C.P.C.

(2.) Plain tiff-non-applicant has filed a suit against the applicant for declaration and injunction with regard to the property in dispute. The non-applicant plaintiff has also filed an application for grant of temporary injunction against the defendant under Order 39, Rules 1,2, C.P.C. During the pendency of the said application the present applicant has filed application under Order 7, Rules 10 and 11, C.P.C. challenging the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Trial Court for hearing of the suit as filed by the plaintiff. The learned Trial Court, on considering the submissions of the learned Counsel for the parties on the aforesaid application refused to decide the question of jurisdiction and held that the question of jurisdiction of the Court shall be decided on the basis of the evidence recorded in the suit at the subsequent stage. The Trial Court also fixed the pending suit for hearing arguments on the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 39, Rules 1,2, C.P.C. Aggrieved by the said order of the Trial Court the applicant has filed this revision.

(3.) The only contention of the learned Counsel for applicant is that as the court has to decide the application for temporary injunction filed by the non-applicant/plaintiff, the question of deciding Court's jurisdiction cannot be deferred because the Court is competent to decide the application for temporary injunction filed by the plaintiff only when it has prima facie jurisdiction to try such suit. The learned Counsel submitted that the order impugned being illegal deserves to be set-aside and the Trial Court be directed to decide the matter of jurisdiction of the Court prima facie before deciding the application for temporary injunction filed by the non-applicant. Counsel relied on the Division Bench decision of this Court in case of vindhya Telelinks Ltd. v. State Bank of India & Ors..