RAMENDRA MOHAN DATTA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application under Clause 13 of the Letters Patent, 1865 for transfer of a suit from the City Civil Court at Calcutta to the High Court.

( 2 ) AN important point of law has been argued in this case and it is necessary to decide the said point before the facts are gone into. The point involved relates to the High Court's power to exercise its extraordinary original jurisdiction conferred by Clause 13 of the Letters Patent 1865 over the suits filed in the City Civil Court in view of certain provisions being amended by the City Civil Court (Amendment) Act 1969 being West Bengal Act XXXV of 1969 which came into force on 14th November 1969. By the said Amendment Act amongst other amendments Section 9 of the City Civil Court Act has been omitted and the pecuniary jurisdiction of the City Civil Court has been raised from Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 50,000/ -.

( 3 ) THIS point could not be raised earlier because under the provision of Section 9 thereof suits and proceedings could be transferred to the High Court and by Subsection (3) of Section 9, Clause 13 of the Letters Patent 1865 was expressly excluded from the purview of the said City Civil Court Act (hereinafter called the said Act ). The said Sub-section (3) of Section 9 prior to its omission from the said Act provided as follows:--" (3) The provisions of this section shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the powers conferred on the High Court under Clause 13 of the Letters Patent. "

( 4 ) IT is argued that this section along with the above sub-section having been omitted by the said Amendment Act, the High Court cannot now exercise its extraordinary original jurisdiction conferred on it by Clause 13 of the Letters Patent to transfer a suit from City Civil Court to this High Court.

( 5 ) REFERENCE has also been made to Section 21 of the City Civil Court Act which provides as follows:--"21. Act to override other law including Letters Patent. The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any other law, including in particular the Letters Patent of the High Court. "the above Section 21 of the said Act has now to be construed without the provision of Section 9 and more particularly of Sub-section (3) thereof. The language of Section 21 clearly contemplates that if any provision of the Letters Patent would be in conflict with any of the provisions of the said Act then the Letters Patent in so far as such provision of the said Act is concerned will not have any effect. It is not that the Letters Patent as a whole has been excluded from the purview of the said Act but what has been sought to be excluded by the said section is in respect of any provision which may be in conflict with any provision of the City Civil Court Act. In short, if the said two statutes will be in conflict with each other then the City Civil Court Act will have the overriding effect over the Letters Patent in so far as such provision is concerned.

( 6 ) ON the basis of the aforesaid construction of the said section it has to be seen whether Clause 13 of the Letters Patent has any application over suits and proceedings pending before the City Civil Court.

( 7 ) THE point has to be considered from several aspects. Firstly, when Section 21 was originally framed the legislature intended that the provisions of the City Civil Court Act should not come in conflict with the jurisdiction conferred by Clause 12 of the Letters Patent in respect of the High Court and as such it was necessary to use the expression "including in particular the Letters Patent of the High Court" in the said section. The legislature at that time was conscious of the position that the High Court had the power under Clause 13 of the Letters Patent and did not intend to affect the said power in any way and as such expressly made the said provision by framing Section 9, Sub-section (3) of the City Civil Court Act which has been set out hereinabove. The expre

Click Here to Read the rest of this document