STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. SAUDANSINGH ROOPSINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ONE Saudansingh filed a suit in the Court of the Civil Judge, Class II, Agar, on the regular side for recovery of Rs. 654.25 from Lalji and Gopalsingh. The suit was filed on 10th November 1965. During the pendency of the suit an objection was raised that the Civil Judge, Class II, had no jurisdiction to try the suit which was of a small cause nature in view of sections 9 and 27 of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 1958 and sections 15 (3) and 16 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. The learned Civil Judge, Class II, has now made this reference to this Court for deciding the following questions:-

(2.) WHETHER it would not be inconsistent between the central law of the Code of Civil Procedure & state law of the M. P. Civil Courts Act, with regard to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Courts invested with small cause powers? (sic)". 2. At the outset, it must be stated that the reference made by the learned Civil Judge is not clear either in regard to facts or in regard to the statutory provisions referred to by him. The only question that arises for determination is whether the suit filed .by Saudansingh, which is plainly of a small cause nature and of the valuation of Rs. 654.25, is triable by the Civil Judge, Class II, Agar, as a regular suit.

(3.) THE answer to the first question posed by the learned Civil Judge is that if at the time of the institution of Saudansingh's suit there was a Court invested with the powers of a Small Cause Court having jurisdiction to try it, then the learned Civil Judge has no jurisdiction to try the suit. In view of this answer, it is unnecessary to consider and answer the second question propounded by the learned Civil Judge.