SIMBRU RAM Vs. DHOLI DEVI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD and gone through the record.

(2.) A suit has been filed by the petitioner for permanent prohibitory injunction as also possession of certain immovable property. Suit was filed in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Palampur. Said Civil Judge held that value of the subject matter of the suit was higher than the upper limit of his pecuniary jurisdiction. So, he ordered return of the plaint. Appeal was filed against the order of return of plaint before the District Judge. The same was assigned to the Additional District Judge, who vide impugned order dated 15.7.2011, copy Annexure P -2, held that there was no evidence on record to enable the Court to come to a conclusion as to what was the exact value of the suit property and that without taking evidence, such a question could not have been decided. Consequently, appeal was accepted and the order of return of plaint was set aside. Matter was, however, sent to Civil Judge (Senior Division), instead of being remanded to Civil Judge (Junior Division), with the observation that in case on the basis of evidence, which the parties may lead, it was found that the value of the subject matter of the suit was higher than the upper limit of pecuniary jurisdiction of Civil Judge (Junior Division), then the Civil Judge (Senior Division), having pecuniary jurisdiction, could deal with the matter, on merits. It is against this part of the order of learned Additional District Judge, regarding assignment of the matter to Civil Judge (Senior Division) that the present petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.