KAHAN CHAND Vs. FAQIR CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this case, the plaintiff-petitioner had instituted a suit in the Court of the additional Sub-Judge, Batala, praying for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from using the plaintiffs deorhi as a passage. During the pendency of the suit, temporary injunction was granted by the Additional Sub-Judge. Later, the plaintiff filed an application under Order 39, Rule2, for action being taken against the defendant as the latter was said to have disobeyed the order of the Additional sub-Judge. Before the Additional Sub-Judge, Batala, could give his decision, the suit was transferred from his Court to the Court of Shri Niranjan Singh, Sub-Judge, first Class, Batala, by order of the District Judge. It is not clear from the file under what circumstances, the suit was transferred, whether under Section 150, Civil procedure Code, as stated by the District Judge or under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The plaintiff pressed his application under Order 39, Rule 2, before the transferee Court. In the meanwhile, on 10th of September, 1965, the plaintiffs suit was stayed under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. No order had been passed by the Court of the Additional Sub-Judge upon the application filed under Order 39, Rule 2. The plaintiffs application asked the transferee Court to pass the necessary order on his application. This application was rejected as the transferee court was of the view that the Court of Additional Sub-Judge alone had jurisdiction and he, therefore, dismissed the plaintiffs application under Order 39, Rule 2 (3 ). The plaintiff went up in appeal to the District Judge from the order of the transferee Court which has been dismissed. From this order of the District Judge, ft petition of revision has been filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil procedure.

(2.) SECTION 150 of the Code of Civil Procedure runs as under:--

(3.) ON the question whether for purposes of proceeding under Order 39, Rule 2 (3), the jurisdiction is with the transferor Court alone or also with the transferee Court to which case has been transferred under Section 24, there is conflict of judicial opinion. The view taken in the Calcutta High Court is that such an application can be entertained by the transferor Court only.