' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The respondent filed a suit for the recovery of Rs,30,307.21 in the Court of Civil Judge at Gujranwala. The suit was decreed ex parte by the trial Court. The petitioner filed an application for setting aside the ex parte decree but it was dismissed. He filed an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Gujranwala. The learned Additional District Judge accepted the appeal and remanded the case to the trial Court for recording a fresh decision on the application for setting aside the ex parte decree. After the remand, the trial Court sent the case back to the District Judge under the impression that after the amendments made in Ordinance XIX of 1979 by Ordinance II of 1983 it had no jurisdiction to hear the application. The learned District Judge entrusted the case to the Additional District Judge. By an order dated 4-12-83, the learned Additional District Judge dismissed the application but modified the terms of the ex parte decree by remitting the interest partially and permitting the petitioner to discharge his liability in instalments. The respondent filed an appeal before the High Court which was accepted on the ground that the Additional District Judge had no jurisdiction to hear the application and that the same could only be disposed of by the Civil Judge. The petitioner seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. The question for consideration in this petition is whether or not the Additional District Judge who also enjoyed unlimited pecuniary jurisdiction was competent to try a suit which fell within the competence of a Civil Judge. Leave to appeal is granted. Security for costs in the sum of Rs,5,000.
The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with direction to the parties to file additional documents, if any, within two months. The pendency of the appeal shall not affect pending proceedings in any Court at any stage.