B.K. Mullick, J.

1. The plaintiff brought a suit for enhancement of rent on two grounds, namely, that there had been a rise in the price of staple food crops, and that the rent paid by the defendant was lower than the prevailing rate paid for similar land with similar advantages.

2. The Munsif framed an issue with regard to the first ground but declined to frame an issue as to the prevailing rate. An application was made to him to re-consider his decision, but that application was unsuccessful, and the plaintiff now seeks the assistance of this Court in revision.

3. It is quite clear that the general rule is that, except on proof of irreparable injury, this Court will nut interfere in revision under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, when there is another remedy open to the applicant. Interlocutory orders are not exempted. Upon the pleadings here, clearly an issue arises whether the rent payable by the defendant is below the prevailing rate and the learned Vakil for the defendant cannot assign any reason why that issue was not framed. He contents himself by suggesting that possibly the Court may have been under the impression that section 31(A) of the Bengal Tenancy Act did not extend to the locality to which the suit relates, but that is not a sufficient answer. The plaintiff is entitled to have the issue raised and to give evidence as to the subject matter of it. The learned Vakil for the opposite party next falls back upon the plea that, the Munsif having decided in exercise of a jurisdiction which he possesses, this Court cannot interfere either under section 115, Code of Civil Procedure, or under section 107 of the Government of India Act, and he cites Chandi Roy v. Kirpal Roy [1911] 15 C.W.N. 682: 10 I.C. 308. In that case Mr. Justice Woodroffe and Mr. Justice Carnduff declined to interfere where the Court had refused the plaintiff's prayer for the amendment of the plaint, but the learned Judges did not lay down any rule that, where there has been a refusal to exercise jurisdiction, the High Court will not be justified in interfering. The case before us is perhaps near the border line so far as section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code is concerned, but it is clear to us that under section 107 of the Government of India Act it is a fit case for our interference.

4. The application will, therefore, be allowed and the Munsif will frame the issue which arises as to the prevailing rate and proceed with the trial in accordance with law. The petitioner will get his costs. Hearing fee one gold mohur.

Robert Lindsay Ross, J.

5. I agree.