SHYAM LAL Vs. SANGAM LAL AND OTHERS
LAWS(ALL)-1965-8-37
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on August 03,1965

SHYAM LAL Appellant
VERSUS
Sangam Lal And Others Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

ABDUL GHANI V. VISHUNATH [REFERRED TO]
SATTI RAMANNA V. (PADALA) ARAIREDDI AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
GANESH TAVANAPPA BURDE VS. TATYA BHARMAPPA MIRJI [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

D.S. Mathur, J. - (1.)THIS is a revision Under Section 115 Code of Civil Procedure by Shyam Lal, Plaintiff, against the order dated 5. 10. 63 of the Additional Munsif of Allahabad rejecting his application under Section 153 Code of Civil Procedure read with Order VII Rule 10 and Order IX Rule 9 Code of Civil Procedure and thereby refusing to restore the suit which had earlier been rejected under Order VII Rule 11 Code of Civil Procedure.
(2.)THE material facts of the case are that the Plaintiff valued the suit at Rs. 1944 -y. but on an objection raised by the Defendants the Munsif held that the correct valuation was Rs. 6535/ -. The Plaintiff was directed to correct the valuation within one week and on his failure to do so the plaint was rejected under Order VII Rule 11 Code of Civil Procedure under order dated 6.3.1963. Thereafter, on 30.6.l966 the Plaintiff moved the present application for recalling the order dated 6.3.63 and restoring the suit to its original number. It was also prayed that the plaint be then returned to the Plaintiff for presentation to a proper court.
None of the sections or orders mentioned in the application were applicable though the court could recall the earlier order in exercise of the in herent jurisdiction under Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure provided that the exercise of the in herent jurisdiction was necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of the process of the court. To put it in brief, if the order of rejection passed on 6.3.1963 is without jurisdiction, the Additional Munsif could exercise the inherent jurisdiction to set right the error committed by him.

(3.)THERE is no longer any dispute in that the present suit was beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Munsif. The point for consideration however, is whether in a suit beyond his pecuniary jurisdiction the Munsif can direct the Plaintiff to amend the valuation and on his failure to comply with the order to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 Code of Civil Procedure; or it is necessary for the Munsif to return the plaint under Order VII Rule 10 Code of Civil Procedure for presentation to a proper court.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.