FAIZ AHMAD Versus FATEH MUHAMMADF

ORDER

SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑ The petitioner filed a suit for pre emption against respondent No l. The suit was decreed on the basis of a compromise. The petitioner was required to pay Rs.55,000 as purchase price, zar‑i‑panjum, upto 2‑9‑1981. The petitioner deposited the purchase price on 2‑9‑1981 and took over the possession of the land in dispute. Subsequently, respondent No.1 moved an application, before the trial Court, alleging that the purchase price was to be deposited before 2‑9‑1981 and as this was not done, the suit stood dismissed. The learned trial Court accepted the application and by an order dated 1.2‑11‑1981 declared the suit to have been dismissed. The petitioner filed a revision petition before the Additional District Judge, Gujrat. It may be mentioned that for the purpose of jurisdiction the suit had been valued at Rs.17,644.80. The learned Additional District Judge thought that as the purchase money exceeded his pecuniary jurisdiction, he was not competent to hear the revision petition. Accordingly, he returned the revision petition for presentation to the petitioner challenged the order of the learned additional, Judge in the High Court in writ jurisdiction but without any success. He now seeks leave to appeal from this court.

2. In support of this petition it is urged that the learned additional district judge erred in law in returning the revision petition solely on the ground that the purchase amount was beyond his pecuniary jurisdiction. This contention need examination. Leave to appeal is granted. Security for cost in the sum of Rs.5,000. the appeal is granted security for coats in the sum of Rs.5,000.the appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission/direction to the parties to file addition document , if any within two months.

M.Y.H./F-70/S Leave to appeal granted.