Dave, J.—The point which has been referred to this Court is "whether an assignment would give cause of action to the court where the assignment was made, though otherwise that court wou!d have no jurisdiction to entertain the suit with respect to the debt which was assigned."

2. It would be proper to set out briefly the facts which have given rise to the question before us. A money suit was filed by the plaintiffs Sensmal Sugarlal, who are non-petitioners No.l and 2 in this revision application in the court of Munsif Merta. Their case was that the defendant Abdul Gafoor who is petitioner in this Court owed a debt to defendants No. 2 and 3 who are non-petitioners No. 3 and 4 in this Court and that he executed a document in their favour on Falgun Sudi 5, Svt. 2005, whereby he promised to pay off the debt in two instalments. According to the plaintiffs, this debt was assigned by defendants No. 2 and 3 to them in consideration of a cash amount which they had obtained from them. The defendant-petitioner traversed the claim on several grounds. One of his objections was that he and defendants No. 2 and 3 were all residents of Khejarla, that transactions between them had taken place at Khej

Click Here to Read the rest of this document