R.M.Sahai, J. - (1.) BEING dissatisfied by setting aside of decree for arrears of rent and eviction in revision Petitioner has filed this petition. The order was not set aside on merits. But on the question of jurisdiction. It was held that although there was no Judge Small Causes Court in Sahabad but the Munsif having decided the suit on regular side it was contrary to Notification No. 580/72 dated 27th September, 1972.
(2.) IT cannot be disputed that after enforcement of Act 37 of 1972 all such suits involving lessor and lessee dispute became cognizable by Judge Small Causes Court. And the Petitioners case was also of similar nature. It was cognizable by Judge Small Causes Court. But the question is where there is no Small Causes Court and suits cognizable by Judge Small Causes are triable by Munsif then does the order becomes without jurisdiction only because it was tried like a regular suit and not as Small Causes case. Absence of jurisdiction and error exercise of jurisdiction react differently. Former renders the order bad and void whereas latter results in irregularity only. It having been found that suits under Small Causes Court Act were also triable by Munsif it was not a case of absence of jurisdiction. Therefore whether order was passed on regular side was of no consequence. It is not the procedure followed by a Court which changes the nature of order but the substance of it which is decisive of nature of jurisdiction. If there was no error in the order otherwise, at least none has been found by revising authority then it could not be set aside merely because it was decided as in regular suit. Signing of order as Munsif and not as Judge Small Causes Court was also not decisive. Moreover deciding the suit by regular trial did not vitiate the order. A Judge Small Causes Court is not debarred from following the procedure of regular suit. Vice versa may not be true. The order could not be held to be bad for this reason. In A.S. Oilani v. Pateshwari Prasad Singh : AIR 1956 P&H 233. It was held that where a Judicial Officer invested with Small Causes Court jurisdiction tries a suit filed as a regular civil suit which might have been tried under the summary procedure in the ordinary matter the character of the suit is not altered. The decision arrived at in the suit should he deemed to be a decision given by a Court of Small Causes and should be treated as such.
(3.) TO the same effect are observations in Kanihya Lal v. Gunwant Rai Agarwal : AIR 1962 All 514. The revising authority therefore committed an error of jurisdiction in setting aside the decree for want of jurisdiction.;