# judgments of such courts decided by Munsif's Court

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 69/VII
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1994-05-24
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 69/VII
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/judgments-of-such-courts-decided-by-munsif-s-court-163797
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

444
(iii)
Of Panchayat Adalat decrees executed and revisions against decrees and
judgments of such courts decided by Munsif's Court
C.L. No. 69/VII f-110 dated 25th June, 1951

The execution records of decrees passed by Panchayati Adalats and executed by a
Munsif should be consigned to the record room of the Panchayati Adalat and not to civil
court record room.
C.L. No. 31/VIII f-110 dated 14th May, 1954

Record of revisions decided by Munsif against the judgment and decree of
Panchayati Adalats should be consigned to the civil court record room and an information
only sent to the Panchayati Adalat concerned.
(iv)
Of cases under the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act transferred
to civil court for decision
C.L. No. 112/VIIf-162 dated 12th November, 1953
The intention of the provision contained in section 222(4) of the U.P. Zamindari
Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1951, seems to be that the case be transferred for
disposal to the civil court; the record of such cases after decision should not be sent to the
revenue court but consigned to the record room of the civil court.
C.L. No. 93/VIII b-63 dated 12th October, 1961

For consignment purposes, the records of appeals under section 50 of the U.P.
Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act may be treated as revenue appeals.
C.L. No. 93/VIII b-63 dated 12th October, 1961
For statistical purposes, appeals under section 50 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition
and Land Reforms Act should be treated as civil appeals.
(v)
Of cases under U.P. Imposition of Ceiling and Land Holdings Act
C.L.No.43/VIII-b-63 dated 27th July, 1963
All appeals under U.P. Imposition of Ceiling and Land Holdings Act, 1961,
should be treated as revenue appeals for the purposes of consignment of their records in
the Record Room and the procedure prescribed in rule 192(2) of General Rules (Civil)
should be followed.
(vi)
Of cases decided by Munsif-Magistrates
C.E.No.44 dated 21st April, 1969
Referring to rule 108 of General Rules (Criminal), 1957*, it has been directed that
the records of cases decided by Munsifs working as Magistrates, like records of cases
decided by other magistrates, be consigned to the judicial record room of the collectorate.

* NOTE: Now 1977 vide notification no. 504/vb-13 dated 5.11.83
445
(vii)
All registers to be filled up to the last page before consignment to record
room.
G.L.No.3609/67-3, dated 30th August, 1915
The words ―after completion‖ occurring in Chapter VII, rule 195 of General Rules
(Civil), 1957, indicate that each register should be filed up to the last page and as such no
register should be sent to record room with blank pages.
(viii) Consignment of records to High Court
C.L. No. 51/Vlllb-65/Admn.'G' dated May 24, 1994
I am directed to say that the Court has noticed that in a good number of cases
report is submitted by the District Judges concerned about records having been lost and
the process of reconstruction started as provided under Rule 216 of General Rules (Civil),
1957 Vol. I. On account of non availability of records while bearing appeals in Civil as
well as Criminal matters and due to non materialization of reconstruction proceedings
prayer is made that the appeal be allowed or the accused be acquitted as the case may be.
This practice has not been appreciated by the Court. There are also instances when a
through checking of the bundles in the Record Room is made, not only the present
missing file is traced out but records lost previously are searched out during such
checking. The existing rules also give emphasis on preservation of records in a suitable
manner so that it may be available if and when needed. It was also the past practice that
during the summer vacation, the staffs willing and surplus are asked to make physical
verification of the records reported to be lost, but later on, this practice seems to be have
been discontinued. Considering this aspect and to ensure availability of records, the Court
has decided that henceforth the Summer Vacation 1994 the District Judges shall direct
the officer-in-charge of the record room to detain sufficient staff in the Judgeship and
such staff under the supervision of officer-in-charge record room, shall perform physical
verification of the bundles to find out whether the records are kept in correct racks and in
correct bundles so as to trace the records which are requisitioned by the High Court at
present or in past.
I am, therefore, to request you kindly to direct the officer-in-charge of the recordroom to follow the instructions given above and a progress report be sent to the Court
after each summer vacation justifying the exercise as required under Rule 215 of General
Rule (Civil), 1957, Volume I.
(ix)
Weeding out of the records of cases in the Subordinate courts.
C.L. No. 9/2003: VIIIb-65 Dated: 4th March, 2003

The Hon'ble Court has expressed its concern that the provisions as contained in
First & Second proviso of sub Rule (6) of Rule 196 of the General Rules (Civil) 1957,
Volume I and Rule 118 of Chapter XII of General Rules (Criminal) 1977, are not being
followed in letter and spirit and the records of the cases are weeded out despite clear
directions of the Court as contained in C.L. No. 22/VIIIb-65, dated 1.4.83, C.L. No.
2/VIIIb-65, dated January 2,1984 and C.L. No. 38/2000, dated 11.8.2000 issued in this
regard.