SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1956 Supreme(Raj) 68

WANCHOO, BAPNA
Gopilal – Appellant
Versus
Hira Chand – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
C M Mathur, for Applicants; S.B.L. Saksena, for Opposite Party

Wanchoo, C.J.—This is a revision by Gopilal and Shri Omkareshwar Mining Works Mauzamabad defendants, against the order of the Civil Judge, Jaipur District, holding that he had jurisdiction to hear suit filed by Hirachand and Motichand, plaintiffs opposite parties,

2. The circumstances in which this revision has arisen are these. The plaintiffs filed a suit for Rs. 8,457/14- against the defendants applicants in the Court of Civil Judge, Jaipur District. The cause of action arose to them in village Mauzmabad. Accorrding to Notification No.F-1(44) Jud/50 dated 2nd June, 1950, published in the Rajasthan Gazette, Extraordinary Part I,, Vol.2, No. 26, dated 14th June, 1950 the Civil Judge, Jaipur District, had jurisdiction over Tehsil Phagi. This Notification was issued under sec 7 of the Rajasthan Civil Courts Ordinance (No. VII of 1950). There is a note to the end of his Notification, which says that the expressions district, sub-division and "Tehsil" in this Notification refer respectively to the districts, sub-divisions and Tehsils formed under the Rajasthan Territorial Divisions Ordinance, 1949. Tehsil Phagi, as it existed at that time, included village Mauzmabad, where the cause of





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top