STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. RATTAN CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is revision petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India assailing order dated 05.04.2008 (Annexure P-4) passed by learned Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur.

(2.) The case has checkered history. Suit filed by the petitioners herein was decided by trial court vide judgment dated 25.11.2003. The petitioners filed appeal bearing Civil Appeal No. 189 of 2003 in the court of learned District Judge, Gurdaspur. Respondents filed cross-objections in the said appeal. Respondents also moved application that the court of District Judge/Additional District Judge had no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and decide the appeal as jurisdictional value was more than Rs.5 lacs. Learned Lower Appellate Court, vide order dated 24.04.2006, upheld the said plea of the respondents and directed that the appeal as well as the cross-objections be returned to the parties for presentation before the proper court (this Court). However, respondents filed F. A. O. No. 2377 of 2006 against the said order. This Court, vide order dated 31.05.2006 passed in said FAO, stayed operation of order dated 24.04.2006 passed by the Lower Appellate Court. However, the petitioners, pursuant to order dated 24.04.2006 of the Lower Appellate Court, filed R. F. A. No. 2824 of 2006 in this Court. This Court, vide separate orders (both dated 19.10.2006), disposed of R. F. A. No. 2824 of 2006 as well as F. A. O. No. 2377 of 2006. The said orders have been reproduced at pages 16 to 18 of this revision petition in paragraphs 10 and 11 respectively. It was observed that pecuniary jurisdiction of the court of District Judge/Additional District Judge has been enhanced to an unlimited extent and therefore, first appeal can be entertained and decided by the court of District Judge/ Additional District Judge, even if value of the suit for purpose of jurisdiction is more than Rs.5 lacs. Consequently, in R. F. A. No. 2824 of 2006, it was ordered that the appeal is remitted to the court of District Judge, Gurdaspur, who may decide the appeal himself or may entrust the same to any other court of competent jurisdiction. In F. A. O. No. 2377 of 2006, it was directed that the appeal preferred before District Judge/ Additional District Judge be sent back to the District Judge, Gurdaspur for deciding the appeal himself or entrusting the same to any other court of competent jurisdiction. F. A. O. No. 2377 of 2006 was dismissed as infructuous.

(3.) Now, the Lower Appellate Court, vide impugned order dated 05.04.2008, has observed that the situation returns to pre-24.04.2006 order stage and consequently, the appeal bearing C. A. No. 189 of 2003 filed before the District Judge and cross-objections filed therein are to be decided by the Lower Appellate Court i.e. Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur. The petitioners have filed the instant revision petition contending that since R. F. A. No. 2824 of 2006 has been remitted by this Court to court of District Judge/Additional District Judge, earlier appeal bearing C. A. No. 189 of 2003 filed by the petitioners and the cross-objections filed therein by the respondents, cannot be entertained by the Lower Appellate Court and only R. F. A. No. 2824 of 2006, which was also remitted to District Judge/ Additional District Judge, has to be decided.