HARLAL GULLA KACHHI Vs. KANCHHEDILAL KASHIRAM NEMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendant's second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 29-7-1989, passed in Civil Appeal No. 63-A of 1988 confirming the decree passed by the trial Court.

(2.) THE relevant facts necessary for the determination of this appeal are as follows :the respondent filed a Civil Suit No. 84-A of 1984 in the Court of Civil Judge, Class-I, against the appellant. This suit was for specific performance of the agreement dated 11-8-1994 whereby the appellants agreed to convey a building site of 15' x 40' abutting Khurai-Bina Road to the respondent. The consideration for the sale of the plot was Rs. 19,000/ -. Subsequently, the respondent applied for amendment of his plaint claiming that he was entitled to claim Rs. 2,000/by way of damages for removal of a shutter from the plot by the appellants and also claimed that a decree for demolition of roof on suit plot put by the appellants. The value of second relief was not disclosed. It appears that the trial Court allowed amendment in the plaint and the plaint was accordingly amended. The respondent did not pay any court-fee on the additional reliefs claimed by him. The suit proceeded as such and a decree for specific performance alone was granted. The same was confirmed in the first appeal. The lower appellate Court has rejected the argument of the appellants that the trial Court did not have pecuniary jurisdiction to try the suit after the amendment in the plaint as the valuation of suit for the purposes of pecuniary jurisdiction went beyond its pecuniary jurisdiction of Rs. 20,000/ -. The reasoning given by the lower appellate Court is that since the respondent did not pay any court-fee on the additional reliefs claimed by him, the respondent had impliedly abandoned the reliefs claimed by him and this fact was further proved by the fact that no issue was framed by trial Court on this point. After examining the merits of the case, the lower appellate Court affirmed the decree of the trial Court.

(3.) THIS appeal was admitted by this Court on the following substantial questions of law by order sheet dated 12-2-1990 : -.