20th July, 2026 (AK) 09 F.A.T 27 of 2024 IA No: CAN 1 of 2024 CAN 2 of 2024 Sri Ratan Ram Vs. Smt. Atyari Devi and others Ms. Sutapa Sanyal Ms. Tannistha Bandyopadhyay ….For the appellant. 1. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits at the outset that this is a Legal Aid matter and the appellant, being financially indigent and visually challenged, was apparently not properly advised and the suit was dismissed ex parte. 2. However, at the outset, we find that the valuation of the suit was Rs.1 Lakh and as such, the concerned District Court is the appropriate court having pecuniary jurisdiction to take up the appeal. 3. Hence, FAT 27 of 2024 is dismissed as not maintainable on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction, with liberty to the appellant, if the appellant so chooses, to prefer an appeal before the competent court having pecuniary jurisdiction. 4. CAN 1 of 2024 and CAN 2 of 2024 are disposed of as redundant in view of the above observations. 2 5. The learned Advocate-on-record for the appellant will be at liberty to take back the certified copies of the impugned judgment and decree upon furnishing photocopies thereof for the records. (Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.) (Supratim Bhattacharya, J.)