- (1.) THIS is a revision by Gopilal and Shri Omkareshwar Mining Works Mauzamabad defendants, against the order of the Civil Judge, Jaipur District, holding that he had jurisdiction to hear suit filed by Hirachand and Motichand, plaintiffs opposite parties,
(2.) THE circumstances in which this revision has arisen are these. THE plaintiffs filed a suit for Rs. 8,457/14- against the defendants applicants in the Court of Civil Judge, Jaipur District. THE cause of action arose to them in village Mauzmabad. Accorrding to Notification No. F-1 (44) Jud/50 dated 2nd June, 1950, published in the Rajasthan Gazette, Extraordinary Part I,, Vol. 2, No. 26, dated 14th June, 1950 the Civil Judge, Jaipur District, had jurisdiction over Tehsil Phagi. This Notification was issued under sec 7 of the Rajasthan Civil Courts Ordinance (No. VII of 1950 ). THEre is a note to the end of his Notification, which says that the expressions district, sub-division and "tehsil" in this Notification refer respectively to the districts, sub-divisions and Tehsils formed under the Rajasthan Territorial Divisions Ordinance, 1949. Tehsil Phagi, as it existed at that time, included village Mauzmabad, where the cause of action arose, Consequently, plaintiffs brought their suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Jaipur District. THE defendants, when they appeared, took a preliminary objection to the jurisdiction of the Court, and said that as Mauzmabad was no longer in Tehsil Phagi on the date of suit the Court of Civil Judge, Jaipur District, had no jurisdiction to try the suit. This objection was based on a notification issued under the Rajasthan Territorial Divisions Ordinance (No. XX of 1949), No. F. 25 (15) Rev. 1/54, dated 23rd November, 1954, Published in the Rajasthan Gazette, Part I-B, dated 4th December, 1954, page 571, According to this Notification, a new Tehsil, named Dudu, was created consisting of 126 villages. Village Mauzmabad was taken out of Phagi Tehsil. and put in this new Tehsil It was also said on behalf of the applicants that this new Tehsil was made part of Phulera Sub-Division (now known as Sambhar Sub-Division), though no such notification has been shown to us. It has, however, been assumed by the court below that Dudu Tehsil is part of Sambhar Sub-Division, and are argument on behalf of the applicants is that as Dudu Tehsil is part of Sambhar Sub-Division, this suit should have been filed before the Civil Judge, Sambhar. THE court below has, however, come to the conclusion that as the jurisdiction of Civil Judge, Jaipur District, as specified in notification No. F-l (44) Jud. 1/50 of 2nd June, 1950, has not been changed, he has jurisdiction to entertain this suit. We are of opinion that this view of the Civil Judge is correct. Jurisdiction of civil courts is fixed by the Government under sec. 7 of the Civil Courts Ordinance (No. VII of 1950 ). Sec. 7 (1), which is relevant for this purposes is as follows: - ''the Government may, be notification in the Rajasthan Gazette, fix and alter the local limits of the jurisdiction of any Civil Court under this Ordinance. " Therefore, the jurisdiction once fixed by the Government under sec. 7 can only be altered by another notification under that section. It cannot be altered by any notification issued under the Territorial Divisions Ordinance, as that Ordinance has nothing to do with the jurisdiction of civil courts. It is admitted by learned counsel for the applicants that no notification has been issued by the Government subsequent to Notification No. F-I (44) Jud. /50 of 2nd June, 1950, altering the respective jurisdiction of the Civil Judge, Jaipur District, and Civil Judge, Sambhar. Therefore, these two courts must still be held to exercise jurisdiction over the area over which they were given jurisdiction by notification No. F-l (44 ). Stress has, however been laid on the note at the end of this Notification, which says that the expressions "district", "subdivision" and "tehsil" refer respectively to the districts, sub-divisions and Tehsil formed under the Rajasthan Territorial Divisions Ordinance, 1949. We are of opinion that this note merely explained what villages were included in Tehsils, sub-division and districts, as they were existing on the date of this notification. If this note had not been there, the notification would have to mention all the villages included in the Tehsils, sub-divisions or districts. But the note does not say that any change in the revenue districts, subdivisions or Tehsils, which may result from notification under the Rajasthan Territorial Divisions Ordinance, will automatically change the jurisdiction of the civil courts. We are, therefore, of opinion that jurisdiction of the Civil Judge, Jaipur District, continues to remain what it was when Notification No. F-K44) Jud. /50, dated 2nd June, 1950, was issued. The revision, therefore, fails, and is hereby dismissed In view of the circumstances, we order parties to bear their own costs of this Court. .;