OM PRAKASH AGARWAL SINCE DECEASED THR. LRS. & ORS. versus VISHAN DAYAL RAJPOOT & ANR.

Citation: [2018] 13 S.C.R. 47 · Decided: 12-10-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.K. SIKRI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
47
OM PRAKASH AGARWAL SINCE DECEASED
THR. LRS. & ORS.
v.
VISHAN DAYAL RAJPOOT & ANR.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 9051-9052 of 2018)
OCTOBER 12, 2018
[A. K. SIKRI AND ASHOK BHUSHAN, JJ.]
Jurisdiction:
Jurisdiction of Additional District Judge (as Small Causes
Court) – To decide the cases pending before it – After amendment
by Uttar Pradesh Civil Laws (Amendment) Act, 2015 – Suit seeking
decree of eviction, rent and damages – Filed before Small Causes
Court [Civil Judge (Senior Division)] – Suit transferred to Additional
District Judge on the ground that value of the suit property being
Rs.27,775/- was more than the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Small
Causes Court i.e. Rs.25,000/- – During pendency of the suit before
Additional District Judge, by Amendment Act, pecuniary jurisdiction
of the Small Causes Court was raised from Rs.25,000 to Rs. One
lakh – Defendants did not raise any objection as to maintainability
of the suit before Addl. District Judge due to lack of jurisdiction in
view of the Amendment Act – Suit was decided on merit and was
decreed – Defendants filed Revision – High Court allowed the
Revision holding that order passed by Addl. District Judge was
without jurisdiction – On appeal, held:In view of s. 15 of CPC read
with provisions of Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 and
Bengal, Agra Assam Civil Courts Act, 1887, legislative scheme is
clear that small cause cases upto value of Rs. 1 lakh should be
taken cognizance by Small Cause Courts presided by Civil Judge
and cases having value of more than Rs. 1 lakh by Disrtrict Judge/
Addl. District Judge having power of Small Cause Court – Section
15(2) of Provincial Small Cause Courts Act provides that suit shall
be cognizable by Court of Small Causes – The word cognizable
takes into its fold institution, hearing and decision of a case
cognizable by it – The statement of objects and reasons explains
the reason for increase of pecuniary jurisdiction, but use of words
“for institution” therein cannot control the express language of the
[2018] 13  S.C.R. 47
                                                    47
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
48
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 13  S.C.R.
statutory provisions – Thus, Addl. District Judge did not have
jurisdiction to try the present case – However, in view of the provision
u/s. 21 of CPC and in view of the fact that  no objection was taken
by defendant to the jurisdiction of Addl. District Judge before that
Court, he is precluded from raising such objection in Revision –
Therefore, even though Addl. District Judge was not competent to
decide the suit, no interference was called for in its judgment in
exercise of Revisional jurisdiction by High Court – Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 – ss. 15 and 21 – Provisional Small Cause Courts
Act, 1887 – Bengal, Agra, Assam Civil Courts Act, 1887 – Uttar
Pradesh Civil Laws (Amendment) Act, 2015.
Interpretation of Statutes:
Rules of interpretation – Held: Legislative provisions have to
be interpreted in a manner, which may advance the object and
purpose of the Act.
Statement of objects and reasons – As an aid to interpret the
statute – Held: Statement of objects and reasons of the statute can
be looked into only as extrinsic aid to find out the legislative intent
only when the meaning of statute by its ordinary language is obscure
and ambiguous – Words in statements of objects and reasons, cannot
control the express language of the statutory provisions.
Judicial Propriety:
Conflicting views by Single Judge Benches of High Court –
Propriety – Held: Instead of giving conflicting view, it is better to
achieve certainty by an authoritative opinion by High Court.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Small Cause Courts were envisaged to be
Courts, which may expeditiously dispose of small causes.  Small
causes were contemplated to be disposed of by the Courts by
following the procedure less cumbersome as compared to those
applicable in the regular civil courts.  By U.P. Act No. 37 of 1972,
the cases by a lessor for eviction of lessee and for recovery of
rent in respect of the period of occupation was also taken in fold
of small causes, which could be taken cognizance by Small Causes
Court after amendment of Clause (4) of Second Schedule of the
Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887.  The amendment made
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
49
in Section 25 of the Bengal, Agra & Assam Civil Courts Act,
1887 by U.P. Act No. 37 of 1972 empowered the State Government
to confer upon any District Judge or Additiona

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.