(1.) 1. The present suit was brought by the Municipal Committee, Nagpur, against the present defendant-applicant for damages for the use and occupation of certain land, and decree was granted by the Judge of the Small Cause Court in favour of the plaintiff.
(2.) THE first point urged in revision on behalf of the defendant-applicant is that the suit was excluded from the jurisdiction of the Small Cause Court under Article 1, Schedule 2, Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. I am however, wholly unable to regard the present suit as one which can properly be described as a suit for the profits derived from immovable property. It is, on the contrary, a suit against a trespasser for damages for the use and occupation of land : cf. Vira Pillai v. Rangaswami Pillai [1899] 22 Mad. 149 and, Krishna Prosad Nag v. Maizuddin Biswas [1890] 17 Cal. 707.