GOURANGA CHANDRA SHAHA Vs. KOAR BAHADUR SINGH AND OTHERS
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Gouranga Chandra Shaha
Koar Bahadur Singh And Others
Click here to view full judgement.
R.S. Bindra, J. -
(1.) This revision petition by the defendant Gouranga Chandra Shaha arises out of a suit instituted against him on 7 -5 -1966 by Koar Bahadur Singh for possession of a piece of land and for recovery of the mesne profits respecting that land, and is directed against the order dated 4 -7 -1968 by which the Munsiff, Sadar, permitted the plaintiff to relinquish a part of the claim relating to mesne profits and to amend the plaint, the nature of which amendment shall be presently stated.
(2.) The facts of the case have to be set out, though briefly, to bring out clearly the point that arises for determination. The area of the land in dispute was mentioned in the original plaint as 1 kara and 1 krant. with specified boundaries. Its market value was fixed at Rs. 400/ -. The amount claimed as mesne profits was put at Rs. 1400/ -. Another relief claimed in the suit was the removal of a hut built on the land in dispute by the defendant Gouranga Chandra, and this relief was valued at Rs. 60/ -. Therefore, all -told, the value of the suit was fixed at Rs. 1860/ - for the purpose of jurisdiction as well as of court -fee. The defendant objected to the correctness of the area of the land in dispute and also its valuation as given by the plaintiff. The Court issued a commission for determining the exact area of the land within the boundaries mentioned in the plaint. The commissioner reported that the area of the land is 2 karas and 16 dhurs, almost double of what had been mentioned in the plaint. That report was accepted by the Court on 23 -3 -1968.
On 10 -6 -1968, the plaintiff applied for amendment of the plaint with a view to make the area of the land in dispute correspond with the report of the Commissioner. Two days thereafter, on 12 -6 -1968. the plaintiff submitted another application to the Court stating that since as a consequence of the report of the Commissioner the area of the land will have to be doubled with the result that the market value of the land will go up from Rs. 400/ - to Rs. 800/ -, he had decided to abandon claim to Rs. 736/ -, representing mesne profits for the period of 18 months, so that the suit could remain within the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court, which, in those days, was Rs. 2000/ -. Both the applications were opposed by the defendant Gouranga Chandra. After hearing the parties' counsel at length, the learned Muniff allowed both the applications by his consolidated order dated 4 -7 -1968. It is against that order that the instant revision petition was filed.
(3.) In the opinion of the Munsiff it was open to the plaintiff to relinquish any part of the claim his sweet will and if the balance of the claim did not go beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court, the suit could be proceeded with in the same Court. He distinguished the authorities cited on behalf of the defendant laying down that a Court has no right to direct the amendment of a plaint when the subject -matter of the suit is beyond its pecuniary jurisdiction.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.