Sinha, A. C. J.

The only question which arises for consideration in this appeal is as to whether this Court has pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the suit?

2. The plaintiff-respondent in Paragraph 11 valued the suit in the following terms :-

"The market value of the suit premises exceeds Rs. 10,00,000/-, since in this suit the plaintiff is claiming possession of the suit premises from a trespasser, who has no right whatsoever to be in occupation and/or enjoyment of the suit premises, the plaintiff has valued this suit at the value of the said property being in excess of Rs. 10,00,000/-. In the premises this Hon'ble Court has and the City Civil Court at Calcutta has not the jurisdiction to receive, try and determine this suit."

The prayers made by the plaintiff in the suit-are -

"(a) Decree for khas possession and vacant possession of the suit premises, being the flat on the 8th floor of 3A, Shakespeare Sarani, Calcutta particulars whereof are contained in the Schedule ‘B' hereto;

(b) Decree for mesne profits @ Rs. 5,000/- per diem from 1st Match, 1995 till vacant possession of the suit premises has been made over to the plaintiff."

3. Admittedly, the rent fixed for the tenament