GURDIAL SINGH Vs. HARBANS SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS regular second appeal has been referred to the Full Bench for the decision of the question whether the appeal lay to this Court. The facts briefly stated are a follows:

(2.) THREE suits for pre -emption were instituted in the Court of Sub -Judge Kalsia in respect of the sale of land situate in village Mirpur which was a part of the erstwhile Kalsia State. They were all consolidated and ultimately a decree was passed in them on 18 -0 -1948. One of the suits had been instituted on 9 -10 -1943 and the others on 22 -10 -1943. On 7 -7 -1948 the vendee preferred an appeal from the decree of the trial Sub -Judge to the Court of District Judge, Kalsia. When Patinla and East Punjab States Union was formed and the Kalsia State became a part of the Union all appeals pending in the Court of District Judge, Kalsia, including the above -mentioned appeal, were transferred to the Court of District Judge, Fatehgarh at Bassi.

(3.) BOTH sides are agreed that by virtue of Article 214 of the Constitution of India the High Court of Patiala is the High Court of the Union and all appeals from the decrees of the District Judges of the Union, including the District Judge of Patiala, lie to this High Court. It is, however, argued by the respondent's counsel that by virtue of Section 8 of the Order mentioned above, since the area in which the suit property is situated has become a part of the Punjab, the appeal from the decree of the District Judge lies to the High Court of the Punjab at Simla. The following is the substance of his arguments. According to Section 8 of the Order all laws of the ?Union that applied to Mirpur ceased to be in force therein with effect from 25th January 1950 and in their place laws of the Punjab came to apply. The Punjab Courts Act, one of the Punjab Acts provides that appeals from decrees and decisions of District Judges lie to the High Court of that State. In the present case though the appeal was decided by the District Judge, Patiala, by virtue of the proviso to Section 8 he should be deemed to have done so under the Punjab Courts Act, that is to say,' the decree passed by him should be deemed to be a. decree passed by a District Judge of the Punjab. Accordingly a second appeal from that decree could only lie to the High Court for the State of Punjab.