- (1.)The petitioners in these revision petitions are common and the question of jurisdiction raised is also common. The petitions, therefore, are disposed of by a common order.
(2.)The petitioners herein are in a highly anomalous situation. NO specific statutory provision has been brought to my notice affording a solution to the problem with which they are faced in these cases.
(3.)The few facts relevant for disposing of these petitions are these: The petitioners filed three suits in the Court of the Munsiff, Krishnarajanagar, which was within the jurisdiction of the District Court at Mysore, prior to the enactment of the Civil Courts Act. The suits in question relate to title and possession of lands situated within the territorial jurisdiction of the Munsiff at Krishnarajanagar. It would appear that the plaintiffs filed an application under Sec.24 CPC. before the then District Court, Mysore, which at the relevant point of time exercised jurisdiction over the revenue Districts of both Mysore and Mandya. The request of the petitioners was acceded to and the cases were transferred for trial before the Munsiff, Srirangapatna. On such transfer, the cases were numbered and registered as O.S.Nos.405 to 407 of 1964. In course of time, the suits were tried and dismissed. When the suits came to be dismissed, the Civil Courts Act had come into force and the Munsiff's Court at Krishnarajanagar continued to be within the territorial jurisdiction of the District Court at Mysore, whereas the Court at Srirangapatna stood transferred and brought within the territorial jurisdiction of the newly created District Court at Mandya. It follows, therefore, that the respective Civil Courts in these two Districts were vested with the jurisdiction to hear appeals preferred from judgments and decrees made by the above mentioned Courts. The petitioners lodged their appeals under S.96 CPC. before the Principal Civil Judge at Mysore in the first instance. The learned Civil Judge refused to entertain the appeals and directed the return of the memorandum concerned therein by an Order made on 6-1-1967. There was also a direction that the appellant should present the memoranda before a Court of competent jurisdiction.