JUDGMENT : 1. The first contention raised in this appeal is that the learned Sub-ordinate Judge who heard the appeal was not competent to do so. The basis of this contention is that the suit when originally filed was filed in the Court of the Sub-ordinate Judge having regard to its valuation. Subsequently the jurisdiction of the Munsif to hear suits of that value was extended and the suit was accordingly transferred to the file of the Munsif. It is admitted that the case was never tried by the Sub-ordinate Judge. An appeal from the decision of the Munsif was presented in the Court of the District Judge who transferred it to the Sub-ordinate Judge, and the learned Sub-ordinate Judge heard the appeal. 2. There can be no doubt that the appeal from the Munsif's decree lay to the Court of the District Judge and that the District Judge was competent to transfer it to the Sub-ordinate Judge. Upon such transfer being made the learned Sub-ordinate Judge had full jurisdiction to hear the appeal. There was nothing to preclude the Sub-ordinate Judge from hearing the appeal and the mere fact that at one time the plaint had been presented in his Court does not take away his jurisdiction to hear the appeal. 3. The next point urged raises a question of fact which is concluded by the finding of the Court below. 4. The appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed with costs, including in this Court fees on the higher scale.