Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Bechan Misir Vs. Markande Misir and ors.

Bechan Misir vs Markande Misir and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Jan 27, 1936
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/461131

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad
Decided On
Subject
Civil

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

-

Key legal issue
Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bechan Misir

Respondent

Markande Misir and ors.

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1936All335

Excerpt

- order1. this is an application in revision by bechan misir, defendant, against the order of the learned district judge, benares, transferring the suit filed against him by the opposite parties from the court of the munsif of shahgunj, to the court of the additional subordinate judge, jaunpur. the valuation of the suit was rs. 2,500. at the time the suit was filed, the munsif of shahganj had jurisdiction to try suits up to the valuation of rs. 5,000. he was subsequently transferred and was succeeded by a munsif whose jurisdiction was only up to rs. 2,000. then an application was made by the plaintiff to the learned district judge, benares, for the transfer of his suit from the court of the munsif of shahganj. a notice was issued to the opposite parties and the learned district judge transferred the suit from the court of the munsif of shahganj to that of the additional subordinate judge, jaunpur. it has been urged by the learned counsel for the applicant that the learned district judge had no power to transfer the suit under section 24, civil p.c.2. he relies on lodgard v. bull (1887) 9 all 191, but it does not apply to the present case because there the suit was never instituted in the court of proper jurisdiction. here the suit was instituted properly in the court (which had jurisdiction to entertain the suit. at the time the suit was transferred lit was pending in the court of the munsiff of shahganj and the learned district judge had authority under section 24, civil p.c., to transfer the suit. all that section 24, civil p.c., requires is that the suit should be pending in a subordinate court which (had jurisdiction at the time the suit was filed. there is no force in the application. it is therefore ordered that the application be dismissed with costs.

Full Judgment

ORDER

1. This is an application in revision by Bechan Misir, defendant, against the order of the learned District Judge, Benares, transferring the suit filed against him by the opposite parties from the Court of the Munsif of Shahgunj, to the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Jaunpur. The valuation of the suit was Rs. 2,500. At the time the suit was filed, the Munsif of Shahganj had jurisdiction to try suits up to the valuation of Rs. 5,000. He was subsequently transferred and was succeeded by a Munsif whose jurisdiction was only up to Rs. 2,000. Then an application was made by the plaintiff to the learned District Judge, Benares, for the transfer of his suit from the Court of the Munsif of Shahganj. A notice was issued to the opposite parties and the learned District Judge transferred the suit from the Court of the Munsif of Shahganj to that of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Jaunpur. It has been urged by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the learned District Judge had no power to transfer the suit under Section 24, Civil P.C.

2. He relies on Lodgard v. Bull (1887) 9 All 191, but it does not apply to the present case because there the suit was never instituted in the Court of proper jurisdiction. Here the suit was instituted properly in the Court (which had jurisdiction to entertain the suit. At the time the suit was transferred lit was pending in the Court of the Munsiff of Shahganj and the learned District Judge had authority under Section 24, Civil P.C., to transfer the suit. All that Section 24, Civil P.C., requires is that the suit should be pending in a subordinate Court which (had jurisdiction at the time the suit was filed. There is no force in the application. It is therefore ordered that the application be dismissed with costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial