PHELU Vs. RAMCHARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for permanent injunction in respect of agriculture land in the lower Court. The issue No. 6 was framed as to whether the civil Court has jurisdiction to try the suit or not. The lower Court decided that issue against the plaintiff-appellant and held that the civil Court has got no jurisdiction to try the present suit and consequently dismissed the suit itself. The first appellate Court confirmed the finding of the lower Court while dismissing the appeal of the plaintiff-appellant, hence this second appeal.

(3.) The learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant contended that if the civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit itself, being related to the agriculture land, then it had no jurisdiction to dismiss it also. Therefore, even if the civil Court had no jurisdiction to try the present suit then at the most it could have returned the suit to the plaintiff-appellant for its presentation in the proper Court.