The lower appellate Court can enter into the question of jurisdiction only if all the three requirements provided under Sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure had been complied with.

B. Lampe, J.

1. Heard Mr. D. Das, learned counsel assisted by Mr. A. Das and Mr. I. Lahiri, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.S. Kyinjing, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. K. Sunar, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Briefly stated the case is the petitioner was authorized to collect tolls from the vehicles at three Municipal toll gates located at Mooralong, New Hills and Mynthong vide order dated 6-7-2001 for a period of one year. Pursuant to his appointment, the petitioner was collecting tolls from the said three gates continuously. After the expiry of the said period of one year, the petitioner submitted an application in the month of May, 2003, praying for extension of the period for another three years on the ground that in course of the operation of the toll gates the petitioner had suffered huge loss due to the low collection from the toll gates. On the basis that the petitioner had submitted an application the respondent No. 2 vide letter dated 24-6-2003 informed the Director of Urban Affairs, Meghalaya that the extension application of the petitioner ought to be considered in view of the fact that the petitioner had actually suffered huge losses due to certain unavoidable circumstances as stated in the application of the petitioner. However, by the letter dated 18-8-2002 issued by the respondent No. 2 the petitioner was intimated that his application for extension was rejected by the Director of Urban Affairs, Meghalaya, Shillong. In the said letter of the respondent No. 2 a reference also made to the letter dated 4-8-2003 issued by the Government. However, the petitioner was allowed to collect the tolls from the three gates on private basis.

3. After the petitioner's application was rejected the respondents floated tender for settlement of the said three toll gates which are being run by the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, had no alternative but to approach the Court. The petitioner, accordingly, filed a Title Suit. No. 40(H)2003 in the Court of Munsiff, Shillong praying inter alia that the tender notice floated by the respondents is null and void ab initio and also that the petitioner be allowed to continue collecting tolls from the said three toll gates. Along with the said Title suit, the petitioner also filed an application for injunction under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 151, C.P.C. The petitioner also filed another application under Section 80(2), C.P.C. the application for temporary injunction was registered as Misc. Case No. 43(H)2003. The learned Munsiff, Shillong by order dated 13-10-2003 passed in Misc. Case No. 43(H)2003 was pleased to direct the parties to maintain status quo as on 13-10-2003 with regard to the operation of the said there toll gates and further directed that any further proceeding/process pertaining to the said tolls shall not be made till the injunction petition is finally disposed of and fix the matter for injunction petition on 13-10-2003.

4. The respondents being aggrieved by the said order dated 13-10-2003 passed in Misc. Case 43(H)03 by the learned Munsiff, Shillong preferred an appeal under Order 43, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure before the District Judge, Shillong. The appeal was registered as FAO & (H)03.

5. The learned District Judge by judgment and order dated 15-12-2003 passed in the said FAO 7(H)03 allowed the appeal on the ground that the learned Munsiff, Shillong has no jurisdiction to pass the said order dated 13-10-2003. The petitioner being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 16-12-2003 passed by the learned District Judge has approached this Court in this petition.

6. At the outset it is noticed that by the impugned judgment and order dated 15-12-2003, the learned District Judge has held that the learned Munsiff, Shillong has no jurisdiction to entertain the Title suit and Misc. Case in question and that being so any order passed by the learned Munsiff in the Title Suit as wel