RAJINDER SINGH Vs. KULTAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Punjab Courts (Haryana Amendment) Act, 1977 (Act No. 20 of 1977) and the Punjab Courts (Haryana Amendment) Act, 1978 (Act No. 24 of 1978) were passed by the Haryana State Legislature. By Act No. 20 of 1977, the jurisdictional value of an appeal to the Court of District M Judge from a decree or order of a Subordinate Judge was raised to Rs. 20,000/-, while by Act No. 24 of 1978 it was provided that an appeal from a decree or order of a Subordinate Judge shall lie to the District Judge, irrespective of the value of the original suit. Under Act No. 24 of 1978, an amendment was also made in S. 41 in order to bring the provisions of that section in conformity with the provisions of S. 100 of the Code of Civil procedure. The effect of the amendment in S. 39 under Act No. 24 of 1978 is that all R.F. As pending in this Court shall stand transferred to the Court of the District Judge.

(2.) R.F.A. No. 359 of 1971 (Rajinder Sineh etc. v. Kartar Singh etc.) and R.F.A. No. 67 of 1974 (Panjab Electrical and General Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. v. The State Bank of India) were pending decision in this Court. In view of the amendment made by virtue of Act No. 24 of 1978, both these appeals were to be transferred to the District Judge for disposal. Two applications under S. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure have been filed in the two appeals respectively, calling in question the vires of the aforesaid two Amendment Acts. These applications came up for hearing before a Division Bench of this Court consisting of brethren D. S. Tewatia and A. S. Bains, JJ. My learned brethren after hearing arguments at great length, referred the matter to be decided by a larger Bench vide order dated Nov. 22, 1978 which reads as under:- "In Civil Miscellaneous No 1351 C.I/1978 in R.F.A. No. 359 of 1971, vires of Haryana Act No. 20 of 1977 called the Punjab Courts (Haryana Amendment) Act, 1977 and the Haryana Act No. 24 of 1978 called the Punjab Courts (Haryana Amendment) Act, 1978 have been challenged. Almost at the conclusion of rather a marathon hearing, it transpired that perhaps the Punjab Act No 35 of 1963 called the Punjab Courts (Amendment) Act, 1963 is also not free from a challenge to its vires and that fact necessitated the hearing of the Advocate General, Punjab, which meant almost a de novo hearing of the entire matter and which was likely to take the same time as has already been spent on it. Since the matter is an important one and the entire field covered by the Advocate General, Haryana has to be covered again by the Advocate General, Punjab, we consider it desirable that the point be decided by a larger Bench. We, therefore, direct that the papers of this case be placed before Hon'ble Chief Justice for constituting a larger Bench. Mr. M. S. Jain is directed to supply to the Advocate General, Punjab, copy of the miscellaneous application. Mr. R. K. Mahajan, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of Advocate General, Punjab." That is how the matter has been placed before us for disposal.

(3.) In order to appreciate the arguments of the learned counsel, it will be necessary to refer to different entries occurring in various lists of the Constitution of India. The relevant entries are set out below:- List I-Union List