MT MUKHTARI Vs. HARBANS SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a case of a nature of cases which have frequently occurred, and some sort of decision has been arrived at in this Court. It cannot be said that the decision has been satisfactory, but in the absence of a better method the decisions have to be accepted as laying down the right law.

(2.) Shorn of all surplusages the case of the plaintiff-appellant was this. She for certain service rendered by the defendant to her, agreed to grant in his favour a lease of a certain property for two years. The defendants taking advantage of the fact that the appellant was a pardanashin lady of immature intellect and a minor, obtained from her a document which she subsequently discovered was a perpetual lease for a very inadequate rent. She accordingly brought this suit out of which this appeal has arisen for obtaining a declaration that the lease was not binding on her. After the parties had adduced evidence the defendant took up the plea that the suit was not cognizable by the civil Court. The learned Munsif did not enter into the question of jurisdiction on the ground that the point had been raised too late. He decreed the suit. The defendant went in appeal before the learned District Judge and he held that the suit was not cognizable by the civil Court as a relief in the matter in dispute could have been obtained by her by institution of a suit under Section 167, Agra Tenancy Act, The learned Judge was requested to hear the case under Section 196, Tenancy Act, but he was of opinion that section had no application.

(3.) In this Court it has been contended that the suit was cognizable by the civil Court and that in any case, the learned Judge should have taken cognizance of the appeal and could have decided it on the merits under the provisions of Section 196, Agra Tenancy Act.