JUDGMENT

S.K. Ghose, J. - The petitioner in this rule is defendant 2. A suit was brought against two defendants by the plaintiff opposite party 1 in the Baliaghata Union Court, District Bogra, being Suit No. 110 of 1933. On the allegations made in the petition, the suit appeared to be one for recovery of arrears of rent which u/s 75, Bengal Village Self-Government Act, would not lie in a Union Court. On 12th November 1933, before the suit was actually brought, to a hearing, the petitioner, defendant 2, made an application u/s 81 of the Act for time in order to move the petition for transfer. But the Union Court refused the application on the ground that it was objected to by defendant 1 because he being a poor man would not be able to conduct the case at Bogra. Thereafter the Union Court decreed the suit. The petitioner filed a motion before the District Judge, but it was summarily rejected. It is contended for the opposite party in this Court that the present application u/s 115, Civil P.C., and Section 107, Government of India Act, would not lie because by Section 93, Bengal Village Self-Government Act, the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, would not apply to any suit before