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

2017 Supreme(All) 701

MANOJ MISRA
DEVENDRA UPADHYAY – Appellant
Versus
BHUDEV PRASAD – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Madhav Jain for the Petitioner; Rishi Chadha for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Manoj Misra, J.—This is a defendant’s petition against an order dated 15.11.2016 passed by the Judge Small Causes, Agra in SCC Suit No. 82 of 2002 by which he has refused to return the plaint of SCC Suit No. 82 of 2002 and has held that it has pecuniary jurisdiction to hear the matter and has thereby fixed a date for arguments. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 17.1.2017 passed by the District Judge, Agra in S.C.C. Revision No. Nil of 2016 by which the revision preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 15.11.2016 has been dismissed in limine.

FACTS

2. The facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows :

The plaintiff-respondent instituted SCC Suit No. 82 of 2002 in the Court of Judge Small Causes, Agra. The suit was valued above Rs. 25,000/-, at Rs. 28,965/-, for the purpose of jurisdiction. The defendant filed written statement. Apart from contesting the proceeding on merits, raised an objection as regards pecuniary jurisdiction of the Judge Small Causes by claiming that the pecuniary jurisdiction of Judge Small Causes was up to Rs. 25,000/- only. It appears that the objection in respect of pecuniary jurisdiction was not conside






























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