CHUNNI Vs. BALDEO SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal raises a question of importance to the zemindars and the tenants of the village of Vaira Firozepur in the Bulandshahr District, The suit was brought by one of the zemindars against 12 occupancy tenants for damages on the allegation that they had without right cut and removed 11 trees of spontaneous growth standing upon their occupancy holdings. It is to be noted that the plaint laid stress on the fact that they had misappropriated these trees and alleged that their acts were contrary to law and justice. The suit was for damages for Rs. 100. It was originally filed in the Court of the Judge of Small Causes at Bulandshahr but was transferred to and decided by an Honorary Munsif.

(2.) The Honorary Munsif found that in the village in question certain tenants (the defendants belonging to that class of tenants) had a right to cut trees of spontaneous growth standing on their fields and dismissed the suit. The plaintiff appealed and his appeal was heard by a Subordinate Judge. The Subordinate Judge decided that the defendants had nO right to out the trees and awarded damages for Rs. 100. A second appeal is filed in this Court.

(3.) A preliminary objection is taken that no second appeal lies. The objection is on the ground that the suit was a suit cognizable by a Court of Small Causes, and that the value and the amount of subject-matter did not exceed Rs. 100. I decide against this objection. Since the amendment of Art. 35(2), Sch. 2, Act 9 of 1887 Small Cause Courts are not competent to decide suits for compensation for acts which are, or save for the provisions of Ch. 4, I.P.C., would be offences punishable under Ch. 17 of the said Code.