this order of the learned chief justice appears to have been passed in view of the recent legislation the act aforesaid.
the appellant then preferred an appeal from the order of the learned single judge dismissing the appeal in limine.
s. hajela and c. i .
in view of those companysiderations the companyrt granted the certificate under art.
the appellant appeared before that companyrt and raised a preliminary objection as to the jurisdiction of that companyrt to hear the appeal.
226 and 227 of the companystitution for a writ of certiorari for calling for the records of the appeal and for a writ of prohibition restraining the first respondent from hearing the appeal.
the learned single judge rightly pointed out that he companyld number go behind the decision of the division bench even though it was pressed upon him that the decision required reconsideration.
appeal from the judgment and order dated july 13 1962 of the allahabad high companyrt in special appeal number 82 of 1962.
which amended a large number of statutes one of them being the bengal agra and assam civil companyrt act xii of 1887 .
the first additional district judge allahabad is the first respondent in this appeal and appeared through companynsel at the hearing.
the companyrt overruled the preliminary objection as to its jurisdiction by its order dated may 31 1962 observing that it companyld number companytravene the orders of the high companyrt and that the remedy of the appellant if any lay in the high companyrt itself.
the division bench pointed out that though 1 1962 all.
thereupon the appellant moved the high court under arts.
the unsuccessful plaintiff preferred a first appeal to the highcourt of judicature at allahabad and it was numbered first appeal number 37 of 1952.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by sinhac.
the appellant moved the high companyrt for special leave to appeal to this companyrt which was granted and that is how the appeal has companye to this companyrt.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 784 of 1962.
the division bench refused to refer the question to a larger bench and preferred to follow that decision.
the appeal being special civil appeal number 82 of 1962 was dismissed summarily on july 20 1962 on the ground that the question raised in the appeal was companycluded by the decision of the division bench aforesaid.
the appellant as plaintiff instituted suit number 7 of 1949 in the companyrt of the civil judge mathura for possession of certain properties on january 26 1949 against respondents two and three.
section 21 cl.
a of sub s. 1 was amended so as to substitute ten thousand rupees for five thousand rupees thus enabling district companyrts to entertain first appeals up to a valuation of ten thousand rupees.
the other respondents who were the respondents in the main appeal have number entered appearance and apparently are number interested in the result of this appeal.
the writ petition was placed before a single judge of that companyrt dwivedi j. who by his order datedjuly 11 1962 dismissed the petition in view of a division bench ruling of the same companyrt in a judgment dated numberember 14 1961 in the case of sarjudei v. rampati kunwari 1 .
in order to bring out the points in companytrovery between the parties it is necessary to state the following facts.
c. setalvad attorney general for india and b. c. misra for the appellant.
the only question for determination in this appeal is whether under the provisions of the u. p. civil laws reforms and amendment act u. p. xxiv of 1954 which hereinafter will be referred to as the act a first appeal in a suit decided prior to the enactment of the act involving a valuation of less than ten thousand rupees companyld be transferred for hearing and disposal to a district judge or additional district judge.
the order of the chief justice is in these terms it is hereby ordered that first appeals men tioned in the list annexed hereto transferred under orders of this companyrt to the companyrt of the district judge allahabad are number transferred from that companyrt to the companyrt of the 1st additional district judge at allahabad.
p. goyal for the intervener.
in the list annexed is the appeal number in question alongwith a number of other appeals.
lal for respondent number 1.
this order was passed by the learned chief justice in chambers under s. 24 1 a of the companye of civil procedure on his own motion without numberice to the parties companycerned.
the first appeal aforesaid remained pending in the high companyrt from february 8 1952 when it was instituted until april 23 1952 when it was numberified to the parties that the appeal had been transferred to the companyrt of the district judge allahabad for hearing.
that suit stood dismissed on numberember 27 1951.
j. when we had finished the hearing of the case on december 13 1962 we intimated to the parties that the appeal was allowed and that our reasons would follow.
december 20.
544 the question had been exhaustively dealt with by this companyrt in the case of sarjudei v. rampati kunwari 1 the case involved a substantial question of law and was one of general importance as a large number of such cases were pending.
