1. AHMAD NAWAZ MALIK, J.---During the course of hearing of this regular first appeal, it has been disclosed that the original jurisdictional value is Rs.2,00,000 (two lacs), according to which the first appeal would lie to the learned District Judge. It appears that inadvertently when amended plaint was filed, the jurisdictional value in the relevant column was described as Rs.20,00,000. To determine pecuniary jurisdiction, the amount described in the original plaint is to be taken into account and if amended plaint has been filed then unless an amendment has been permitted, any description without permission of the Court in the amended plaint is not considered. It appears that some clerical or typographical mistake has been made and the amount was inadvertently mentioned as Rs.20,00,000. To determine pecuniary jurisdiction, original plaint is the basis to determine the appellate. Forum. Accordingly, the appeal would lie before the learned District Judge. Office is, therefore, directed: to transmit the same as well as the record to the District Judge, Muzaffargarh However, keeping in view the time consumed in disposal of the appeal on account of the aforesaid error, the learned District Judge is directed to dispose of the appeal within 2 months after the receipt of this order. This appeal stands disposed of.