LAWS(JHAR)-2016-9-96

EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER, MUGMA AREA, EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, AT MUGMA, POST OFFICE Vs. JAGANNATH MANJHI, SON OF LATE CHITTIZ MANJHI RESIDENT OF SASNAVDHIHA, PO NIRSA, PS NIRSA, DIST. DHANBAD

Decided On September 29, 2016
Eastern Coalfields Limited Through General Manager, Mugma Area, Eastern Coalfields Limited, At Mugma, Post Office Appellant
V/S
Jagannath Manjhi, Son Of Late Chittiz Manjhi Resident Of Sasnavdhiha, Po Nirsa, Ps Nirsa, Dist. Dhanbad Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I.A. no. 6770 of 2016 The present interlocutory application has been filed for withdrawal of First Appeal no.36 of 2014.

(2.) It is submitted by the counsel that the present appeal has been filed inadvertently under the bona-fide mistake and impression that since the suit was valued at Rs.2,75,000.00 hence the appeal would lie before the High Court as the District Judge (Judicial Commissioner under CNT Act) did not have the pecuniary jurisdiction to hear an appeal valued over Rs.2,50,000.00. That since the appeal has arisen under Sec. 87(2) of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908, against the order 26.09.2013 passed by the Settlement Officer, i.e., the Revenue Officer, Dhanbad under Sec. 87 of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act and was instituted for correction of the revenue records, hence, the appeal should have been preferred before the Principal District Judge, Dhanbad. On the above grounds he seeks permission to withdraw the present appeal for presenting it before the appropriate authority i.e., the Principal District Judge, Dhanbad (the Judicial Commissioner under the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act 1908). It is urged that there has been a delay of 43 days in preferring the present first appeal and the same may be condoned in the interest of justice.

(3.) Heard. Permission is accorded to withdraw the appeal. The court below shall consider the prayer for condonation of delay sympathetically by taking into account that the petitioner/appellant had presented the appeal before this court due to a bona-fide mistake that the appeal was beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Principal District Judge (the Judicial Commissioner CNT Act). It is made clear that the appeal preferred under Sec. 87(2) under the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act of 1908, lies before the Principal District Judge, i.e., the Judicial Commissioner under the Chhotnagpur Tenancy Act.