SHIV KAUR Vs. L NANK CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LALA Nanak Chand and others, (hereinafter called the plaintiffs), filed a suit for ejectment and recovery of arrears of rent against Smt. Shiv Kaur and others, (hereinafter called the defendants), in the court of Sub Judge, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar. By his judgment dated 24 -12 -1973, the learned Sub Judge decreed the suit. The defendants filed an appeal to the District Judge, which was transferred for disposal to the Additional District Judge, Srinagar. The appeal was filed beyond time. Alongwith the appeal the defendants filed an application for condonation of delay on the ground that they were kept in dark by their lawyer about the result of the suit. At the hearing of the application counsel for fthe defendant sought opportunity to produce evidence in support of the allegations made in the application. The learned Additional District Judge declined the request observing:

(2.) APPEARING for the respondents, Mr. A. N. Raina raised a preliminary objection that the revision was incompetent because, as he put it, the order is a mere interlocutory order closing the evidence and does not amount to a "case which has been decided within the meaning of section 115 Code of Civil Procedure. The determination of this question depends on the true interpretation of section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which provides :

(3.) THIS is as we have it in the Code of Civil procedure prevailing in our State. It differs from Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure prevailing in the rest of India in one respect and, that is, it contains an additional clause (d) which does not find place in section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure prevailing elsewhere in India. In either case, however, the jurisdiction of the High Court arises only if there is a case decided by the subordinate court in which no appeal lies to the High Court. But whereas the High Courts in India can exercise the jurisdiction if the MISSING LINE