MASTER OM PARKASH Vs. RULDA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter has been referred to a Division Bench for decision of the question whether the Court of Sub-Judge 1st Class, Nalagarh, had jurisdiction to entertain the suit which was for recovery of Rs. 95 when the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of Panchayati Adalat, Ramshahr. According to sub-section (1) of section 79 of the PEPSU Panchayat Raj Act, a Panchayat Adalat has got the jurisdiction to try a suit for the recovery of movable property or the value thereof when the claim in case of Adalat Class I does not exceed five hundred rupees, and the claim in case of Adalat Class II does not exceed two hundred rupees in respect of civil suits. Sub-section (4) provides as follows :-

(2.) It was argued before the learned Sub-Judge that before the Adalat can have jurisdiction the defendant must fulfil both the conditions, namely (a) of residence within the limits of its jurisdiction at the time of the institution of the suit, and (b) the cause of action should have arisen within those limits. The learned Sub-Judge has held quite rightly that the use of the word "or" shows that even if one of the conditions is satisfied, the suit would be within the jurisdiction of the Adalat. He, therefore, made an order under section 81(1) of the PEPSU Panchayat Raj Act for the transfer of the case to the Panchayat Adalat, Ramshahr. A petition for revision was preferred in the erstwhile PEPSU High Court by the plaintiff in which one of the grounds raised was that notwithstanding the provisions of sections 79(4) and 81(1) of the PEPSU Panchayat Raj Act, 2008 Bk. the Sub-Judge would still have jurisdiction. The matter therefore which has to be considered by the Division Bench is whether the Adalat and the Court of the Sub-Judge have concurrent jurisdiction or whether the aforesaid provisions of the PEPSU Panchayat Raj Act have conferred exclusive jurisdiction on the Adalat, the result of which would be that the Civil Courts would have no jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

(3.) In Kartar Singh v. Pritam Singh,1956 AIR(Pepsu) 78 Mehar Singh, J. has held that although Panchayati Courts have been given jurisdiction in certain suits by the PEPSU Panchayat Raj Act, the jurisdiction of ordinary civil Courts in such suits has not been excluded or taken away, the result of which is that both Courts have concurrent jurisdiction in such suits. The learned Judge considered that there was no specific provision in the Act which excluded the jurisdiction of ordinary civil Courts in suits that were triable by the Adalat. He referred to the provisions of sections 62, 81 and 96 of the Act, but based his decision largely on the provisions of section 93 of the Act. According to him, sub-sections (1) (b) and (2) of section 93 of the Act showed that where the Adalat found a suit too complicated for it to try, it could transfer it to an ordinary civil Court of competent jurisdiction.