- (1.) The present application in revision has been filed as against an order dt. 14-6-1988 passed by the learned 4th Additional Civil Judge, Dehradun, by virtue of which application for deciding the question of jurisdiction as preliminary issue has been rejected.
(2.) The contention of the applicant is that under S.21, C.P.C. the objection as to jurisdiction having been raised at the initial stage the Court committed an error in rejecting the said application. It was further contended that the decision suffers from illegality insofar as it holds to the contrary while referring to the case Sausa Musa Sugar Works v. Chunnilal Choraria, AIR 1975 Gauhati 34. In that case the Court did not record finding that the case cannot be decided subsequent to the date of filing the written statement. It was further contended that the Court's view that while weighing the fact evidence shall have to be led twice was not a proper approach and in doing so it fell into error and thus it calls for interference by this Court.
(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the impugned order and gone through the records. I do not find any illegality or any jurisdictional error committed by the Court white rejecting such an application. The Court has held that this question of jurisdiction would be decided after the filing of the written statement and after evidence are led since question of jurisdiction is such which can only be decided after such a stage.;