: 1 : vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.467 OF 2009 Nandlal Gokul Kumhar & Ors. ... Applicants V/s. Shobhnath Girdhari Kumbhar ... Respondent Mr.M.P. Mishra for Applicants Mr.S.P. Srivastava for Respondent CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: NOVEMBER 5, 2009 P.C.: 1. This Civil Revision Application has been preferred against the decision by the appellate bench of the Small Causes Court dated 15.6.2009. The grievance of the learned advocate for the applicant is that the appellate Court has decided the appeal on the proceedings being transferred from the City Civil Court to the Small Causes Court. According to him, it is the trial Court which should have decided the suit of the appellant. He further submits that no appeal has been filed by the applicant herein and, therefore, the judgment impugned must be set aside. 2. Undisputedly a suit was filed by the respondent herein in the Small Causes Court on several grounds against the applicants. One of the issues raised was whether the defendants i.e. the applicants herein were residing as gratuitous : 2 : licencees. The defendants had raised the issue regarding jurisdiction of the Small Causes Court to decide the issue as according to them the suit ought to have been decided by the City Civil Court. The trial Court held that it had no jurisdiction to decide the suit as the defendants were gratuitous licencees. The other issues were therefore not decided by the trial Court. 3. Since the trial Court had held that it had no jurisdiction, the plaintiffs approached the City Civil Court. During the pendency of the matter before the City Civil Court, the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Prabhudas Damodar Kotecha & Anr. v. Smt.Manharbala Jeram Damodar & Ors., 2007(4) ALL MR 651 has held that the Small Causes Court would have jurisdiction to decide a case between a landlord and a gratuitous licencee. On this decision being rendered the suit was transferred from the City Civil Court to the Smal Causes Court. However, instead of transferring it to the trial Court it was transferred to the appellate Court. In my view, this transfer to the appellate Court was erroneous. The suit ought to have been transferred to the trial Court and the trial Court ought to have heard and disposed of the matter. The trial Court had not decided the issues on merits whereas the Appeal Court has decided all the issues on merits. This could not be done without the trial Court’s decision in the suit on merits. 4. In this view of the matter, the order of the appellate Court is set aside. The matter will be remanded to the trial Court to decide the suit on merits.. 5. Civil Revision Application is disposed of accordingly.