Where the territorial jurisdiction of a court is transferred to another court, the court to which the territorial jurisdiction is transferred has jurisdiction to entertain an application under Order 9, Rule 13, C. P. C., to set aside an ex parte decree passed by the court which originally had jurisdiction.

VENKATRAMA SASTRY, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application to revise the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Tanuku disposing of a preliminary objection regarding Jurisdiction raised by the petitioner herein to the entertainment of an application under Order 9, Rule 13, C. P. C. by the lower court arising in the following circumstances :

( 2 ) AN extent of one acre of land was acquired by the Government and in O. P. 69 of 1966 on the file of the Sub-Court, Eluru a sum of Rs. 6340. 52 was deposited by the Government towards compensation. The first claimant in the said O. P. was one Chittoori Ramachandra Rao. He was set ex parte. The amount was paid o other claimants by the order in the O. P. dated 17-2-1967.

( 3 ) ON 10-12-1968 by G. O. Rt. No. 4550 a new Sub-Court at Tanuku was constituted. It came into existence on and from 10-1-1969. By virtue of Notification No. 3 in the said G. O. given under Section 10 of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Civil Courts Act, 1873. the local limits of the jurisdiction of the District Court and the Subordinate Judge Courts in West Godavari were refixed as per the table mentioned therein. Against the entry No. 2 Sub-Court Eluru, the following has been mentioned in Col. 3 as its territorial jurisdiction. "original Jurisdiction: Area covered by the territorial jurisdiction of the District Munsifs of Eluru, Chintelapudi and Tadepalligudem. Appellate Jurisdiction: Such of the appeals as are transferred by the District Court. West Godavari over to the Munsifs of Eluru, Chintalapudi and Tadepalli-gudem. "against entry No. 4 relating to Sub-Court. Tanuku (Temporary) the following has been mentioned to be its territorial jurisdiction. "original and Appellate Jurisdiction : Over the areas covered by the territorial jurisdiction of the Munsifs of Tanuku and Kovvur. "the respondent herein filed I. A. No. 619 of 1969 on 8-8-1969 for setting aside the ex parte decree passed in O. P. No. 69 of 1966 as against him. The petitioner herein who was the contesting respondent in that application filed J. A. 370/74 under Order 14, Rule 2 and Section 151, C. P. C. praying to hear about the maintainability of the above petition on the question of jurisdictional issue in the first instance in the affidavit filed in support of that application it was stated that the respondent herein has no manner of right to file I. A. No. 619 of 1969 in the Sub-Court, Tanuku and it is not maintainable according to law in that court. The said application was contested by the respondent by filing a counter wherein he stated that that court has jurisdiction which was established on 10-1-1969 and all the business of Eluru Sub-Court so far as jurisdiction of Tanuku Taluk is concerned was transferred to that court (Sub-Court, Tanuku) from 10-1-1969 onwards. Therefore, the Sub-Court Tanuku to which the business is so transferred has the same power and was performing the same duties as those of Eluru Sub-Court previously. It was. therefore, stated that the petitioner has no right to question the jurisdiction of that Court.

( 4 ) THE lower court took up the point about the jurisdiction as follows:"whether this court has jurisdiction to entertain the petition I. A. 618/69 in O. P. No. 69 of 1966. "the lower court held that the Sub-Court Tanuku had jurisdiction to entertain the said petition. In that view the said application was dismissed.

( 5 ) IN this revision preferred against the order Mr. T. Veerabhadriah, learned counsel for the petitioner, made the following submissions. Section 150, C. P. C. speaks of a transfer of business of any court to another court. Where the notification in question does not transfer the business pending as well as disposed of -- the new court can have jurisdiction only in regard to new business, but not in regard to old business. When once a court has jurisdiction to entertain a suit at a time when it had territorial jurisdiction, it continues to have that jurisdiction to pass a final decree in that proceeding irrespe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document