Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Anjani Kumar, J.
RAMESHWAR AND BRAJESH - Appellant
Versus
VIITH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DEORIA AND ORS. - Respondents
C. M. W. P. 2770 Of 1985
Decided On : 01/23/2002
Cognizability - Civil Court Jurisdiction - The court held that the suit was cognizable by the civil court based on the relief clause and recent Supreme Court decisions, setting aside the revisional court's decision and quashing the order.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners-plaintiffs filed a suit before the civil court seeking certain reliefs. The defendants objected, stating that the suit was not cognizable before the civil court and should be relegated to the revenue court. The trial court initially ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, but the revisional court later decided that the suit was not cognizable by the civil court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the suit was cognizable by the civil court, setting aside the revisional court's decision and quashing the order.
Issues: The main issue was whether the suit was cognizable by the civil court or should be relegated to the revenue court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the relief clause and recent Supreme Court decisions to determine that the suit was cognizable by the civil court.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the revisional court's decision and quashing the order, with no order as to costs.
( 1 ) PETITIONERS-PLAINTIFFS filed Suit No. 392 of 1982 before the Court of Munsif, Deoria with the following reliefs :. . (VERNACULAR MATTER OMMITED ). .
( 2 ) AN objection was filed by the defendants before the trial court that the suit is not cognizable before the civil court, therefore, the same should be rejected and the petitioners-plaintiffs be relegated to the revenue court. The trial court decided the said suit in favour of the plaintiffs that the suit is cognizable by the civil court.
( 3 ) BEING aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the defendants preferred a revision before the revisional court and the revisional court arrived at and recorded findings that the suit is not cognizable by the civil court, therefore, the suit may be dismissed and the petitioners-plaintiffs may be directed to go to the revenue court.
( 4 ) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. Shri Jokhan Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that in view of the law, which will depend on the allegations in plaint and also the relief clause and in view of the recent Supreme Court decision in Sri Ram and Anr. v. Ist additional District Judge and Ors. , 2000 (1) AWC 862 (SC) : JT 2001 (2) SC 573, wherein the supreme Court has affirmed the decision of Full Bench decision in Ram Padarath and Ors. v. IInd Additional District Judge, Sultanpur and Ors. , 1989 (1) AWC 290 (LB) ; 1989 RD 21. the law laid down by Supreme Court and after going through the relief clause, the view taken by the revisional court is not correct and suffers from the manifest error of law.
( 5 ) IN view of what has been stated above, it is abundantly clear that the suit is cognizable by the civil court and in this view of the matter, the order dated 5. 11. 1984, Annexure-3 to the writ petition, passed by the revisional court is liable to be set aside and is hereby quashed.
( 6 ) WITH the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is allowed. There will, however, be no order as to costs.
.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
