JASWANT SINGH, J. - (1.)THE plaintiff who is a contractor originally brought a suit on January 14, 1966, in the court of the District Judge, Udhampur for, rendition of accounts relating to the execution of the work of construction of Motor Road from Forebay to the site of Power House of the Chenani Hydel Project (RD O, to RD 20,000) allotted to him vide agreement dated December 29, 1964, valuing it for the purpose of court fees and jurisdiction at Rs. 5,100/ -. A preliminary decree directing accounts to be taken was passed in the said suit by the District Judge on July 25, 1966 On appeal a Division Bench of this court vide its judgment dated July 10, 1970, set aside the preliminary decree passed by the District Judge holding that the suit for rendition of accounts was not maintainable. The Bench, however, granted an opportunity to the plaintiff to amend his plaint by claiming a specific sum and "putting a proper valuation on his claim in the trial court." Pursuant to the aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench of this court the amended plaint claiming Ra. 23,785.42 from the defendant was filed in the court of the District Judge on October 3, 1970. On an objection however, being taken on behalf of the defendant to the effect that the valuation of the suit being in excess of the pecuniary jurisdiction of the court, the plaint ought to be returned for presentation to the proper court under Order 7 Rule 10(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, the District Judge passed an order on November 24, 1970, returning the plaint to the plaintiff for presentation to the proper court Thereafter the plaintiff presented the plaint on the original side of this court on November 25, 1970. After the filing of the written statement by the defendant and the framing of the issues a prayer was made on behalf of the plaintiff before the learned Single Judge for transfer of the suit to the court of the District Judge, Udhampur, on the ground that the cause of action having arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of that court, it would tend to the convenience of parties if the suit is tried in that court. This prayer was resisted on behalf of the defendant on the ground that the valuation of the suit being above rupees twenty thousand, it had not only to be instituted in but had also to be tried and disposed of by this court. Reliance in support of this objection was placed upon Section 56(2) of the Constitution Act, 1996 (Act XIV of 1996 Samvat: 1939 A.D.) and clause 10 of the Letters Patent issued to the High Court in 1943 AD. It was on the other hand contended by the learned counsel for the plaintiff that the only restriction contained in the aforesaid provisions of law relied upon by the plaintiff was regarding the institution of a suit of which the value is Rs. 20,000/ - or above and not regarding its trial and determination by the District Court which has unlimited pecuniary jurisdiction under Section 20 of the Civil Courts Act, 1977 (1920 AD). Feeling that the point raised before him involved an important question relating to the interpretation of Section 56(2) of the Constitution Act, 1996, Clause 10 of the Letters Patent and Section 20 of the Civil Courts Act, 1977, (1920 A.D.), D.D. Thakur J has referred it for decision to this Bench. It is how the matter is before us.
(2.)THE learned counsel for the parties has reiterated the submissions made by them before the learned Single Judge.
(3.)WE have given our anxious consideration to the sub -missions of the learned counsel for the parties.
It will be seen that the jurisdiction exercised by the High Court in relation to the administration of justice immediately before the commencement of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir which came into force on January 23, 1957, was not only left intact but was specifically seved by Section 102 of the Constitution. Now the jurisdiction in relation to Civil Suits and original proceedings was before the coming into force of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir derived by the High Court from Section 56(2) of the Jammu and Kashmir Constitution Act, 1996, and clause 10 of the Letters Patent, which are reproduced below for facility of reference: "S. 56 of the Constitution of J & K. (2) The High Court shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine any original civil suit or other proceeding of which the value is not less than rupees twenty thousand and every such suit or proceeding shall be instituted in the High Court." Clause 10 of the Letters Patent (Civil Original Jurisdiction of the High Court) "And we do hereby ordain in that the said High Court of Judicature shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine any suit or original proceeding of which the value is not less than rupees twenty thousand where the said suit or original proceeding relates to any right, title, or obligation arising in the towns of Srinagar and Jammu or anywhere else within our State and notwithstanding anything contained in any Section of the Code of Civil Procedure every such suit or preceding shall be instituted in the said High Court."