RAJJUPURI GOSAI Vs. DEWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. The applicant filed a plaint in the Court of the Second Class Subordinate Judge, Harda. That Court considered that the case was cognizable by the Court of Small Causes and returned the plaint for presentation to the appropriate Court. That Court however held that the suit was not triable by it and returned the plaint to the applicant once more. The applicant has applied in revision asking this Court to determine which Court has jurisdiction to entertain the suit and to pass orders accordingly. The correct procedure in this case would have been to make an application to the District Judge under the provisions of Order 46, Rule 7, Civil P. C. This the applicant admits, but contends that as the judgment of Staples, A. J.C., in Cantonment Board, Jubbulpore v. Phulchand AIR 1932 Nag 70 had not been published by the time this application in revision was made he was apprehensive that the view prevailing in the Allahabad High Court which was followed by the District Judge, Jubbulpore, in his order which was set aside in Cantonment Board, Jubbulpore v. Phulchand AIR 1932 Nag 70 might be accepted and that the time spent in prosecuting the matter there might have counted against him in revision if he should apply to this Court on his failure in the Court of the District Judge. Had the decision in Cantonment Board, Jubbulpore v. Phulchand AIR 1932 Nag 70 which lays down that the District Judge is bound to submit the record to the High Court under Order 46, Rule 7, Civil P. C., if required by a party, been available earlier the applicant states that he would have made his application to the District Judge.

(2.) ALTHOUGH it is open to me, following the decision of Staples, A. J. C., in Cantonment Board, Jubbulpore v. Phulchand AIR 1932 Nag 70 to come to a decision as to the forum where the applicant's suit should be tried, I am, nevertheless, of the opinion that it would be more desirable that I should not do so. The applicant has other remedies open to him provided by law which have not yet been exhausted and it is a well recognized principle that this Court should not be approached so long as other remedies are available. It is true that the matter has to be decided by this Court ultimately, but that is no reason why the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code should be ignored; this Court should do nothing to encourage litigants to avoid the procedure laid down and seek a speedy remedy by eliminating steps provided. The result is that the application for revision is dismissed. The applicant should approach the District Judge. I make no order as to costs.