KRISHNA KUMAR KHANDELWAL Vs. MANGAL PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two writ petitions involving similar question of law was referred to a larger Bench by the learned single Judge who had expressed doubt with regard to correctness of the decisions rendered in the cases of Trilokchand v. Jabbar Khan, 1967 MPLJ Short Note 78 and Indori Lal v. Indore Municipal Corporation, 1976 MPLJ SN 5 and Shri Hanuman Rice Mill, Raigarh v. G. G. Dhandekar Machine Works Ltd., 1984 MPLJ SN 2, whereby a view was expressed that when question of allowing an amendment would result in a situation where the claim would exceed the pecuniary jurisdiction of the trial Court, the legal procedure for the trial Court would be to return the plaint together with the application for amendment for consideration of that Court which would have jurisdiction to consider the plaint if the amendment was allowed.

(2.) At the outset we may state that the aforesaid view was taken placing reliance on the decision rendered in the case of Lalji Ranchhoddas v. Narottam Ranchhoddas, AIR 1953 Nagpur 273. In the case of Lalji Ranchhoddas (supra) the High Court of Nagpur had ruled thus :

(3.) Similar view was expressed in the case of Pandit Rudranath Mishir v. Pandit Sheo Shankar Missir, AIR 1983 Patna 53.