Judgment :- 1. C.M.P 1444/73 is a petition for injunction which has been filed by the plaintiff in a suit, the plaint of which has been presented in this Court. The plaint should have been presented before the Munsiff's Court at Thiruvalla. In Para.8 of the plaint, it is stated: "As there is NGO. Strike the plaint and other papers are not received in the Thiruvalla Munsiff's Court and hence the plaint is being presented to the Honourable High Court for passing orders of emergent nature. Unless immediate orders are obtained there is possibility of imminent danger to the plaintiff and his property". The plaint and the CMP. were sent before me and In CMP.1444/73,1 passed an order of interim injunction and notice. The defendant has entered appearance and learned Counsel appearing for the defendant raised a preliminary objection before me that this Court is not competent to entertain the plaint. Though in view of the prevailing circumstances by which the subordinate courts are prevented from functioning and thereby litigants are deprived of the elementary right of approaching them for emergent orders, I am constrained to uphold the preliminary objection. S.19 of the Civil Courts Act reads: "S. 19 (1). The High Court may permit the Civil Courts under its control to adjourn from time to time for periods not exceeding in the aggregate sixty days in each year. (2) During the adjournment of a Civil Court, the High Court shall have the power to make provisional orders in all urgent matters and for such purpose to receive appeals, plaints and petitions which would ordinarily be presented to such Civil Court and any such order shall remain in force only until the matter has been heard and decided by the court having jurisdiction." The provision has no application here for the simple reason that there has been no adjournment of the civil courts as contemplated in S.19(1) of the Civil Courts Act. There is no power in the High Court Act also enabling the Court to receive plaints and pass orders in situations which are considered urgent. S.3 of the High Court Act which deals with the powers of a Single Judge empower, a Single Judge to exercise original jurisdiction under any law for the time being in force. That provision cannot be of any assistance to the plaintiff in this case. S.3 of the High Court Act which deals with the powers of a Single Judge empower, a Single Judge to exercise original jurisdiction under any law for the time being in force. That provision cannot be of any assistance to the plaintiff in this case. S.8 of the High Court Act which deals with the powers of a Vacation Judge 'S 8 (1). During the adjournment of the High Court the Chief Justice shall nominate a Single Judge of the reads: High Court for the bearing of all matters which require to be immediately or promptly dealt with and such judge shall have all the powers of the High Court, except;in cases in which such power must be exercised under the provisions of any law by mate than one judge." This is only complimentary to S.19 (2) of the Civil Courts Act. Counsel for the plaintiff relied on S.15 of the CPC. which reads: "Every suit shall be instituted in the Court of the lowest grade competent to try it". Relying on the above, he contended that S.15 confers jurisdiction on the High Court also to receive plaints and dispose of the original suits, though it may not be a court of the lowest grade. According to him, there is no want of jurisdiction in the High Court in receiving the plaint and passing emergent orders in the light of the circumstances pointed out in Para.8 of the plaint. I do not think it necessary to say that S.15 of the CPC., is not a provision conferring jurisdiction on any court. If there is a hierarchy of courts in whom original jurisdiction is conferred, S.15 CPC., which is only procedural in character says that the institution must be in the court of the lowest grade competent to try it. S.11 of the Civil Courts Act provides that the jurisdiction of a District Court or Subordinate Judge's Court, subject to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, extends to all proceedings of a civil nature and the jurisdiction of a Munsiff's Court extends to all like suits and proceedings not otherwise exempted from its cognisance of which the amount or value of the subject-matter does not exceed five thousand rupees. The District Court is, therefore, a Civil Court of original jurisdiction of unlimited value. According to the Civil Courts Act, that is the highest court of original jurisdiction. The District Court is, therefore, a Civil Court of original jurisdiction of unlimited value. According to the Civil Courts Act, that is the highest court of original jurisdiction. Reading the provisions of the High Court Act and the Civil Courts Act, though it may be possible for the High Court to exercise original jurisdiction in certain circumstances, there is no conferment of original jurisdiction at the initial stage to enable the High Court to receive plaints for the purpose of the trial of suits. Reliance on S.24 of the CPC. by the plaintiff's counsel is not of any relevancy for the reason that by S.24, the High Court is given the power to withdraw a suit to its file from the file of another court S.24 does not, therefore, enable the High Court to receive plaints at the first Instance. S.151 CPC. also cannot help the petitioner. The view I have taken is supported by the observations of the Supreme Court in AIR. 1965 SC. 1049. I have, therefore, to hold that this Court is not competent to entertain the plaint and the plaint will have to be returned to the plaintiff for presentation to the proper court. If the plaint is represented in the proper court within three weeks from today, the plaintiff will get credit for the court fee that he has already paid. 2. Before parting with this case, I am constrained to observe that in situations like the one pointed out in Para.8 of the plaint, some provisions will have to be made whereby persons who are anxious to get orders from court are allowed to approach the High Court and thereby get emergent orders. If on account of the N. G. Os.' strike, subordinate judicial officers are paralysed from functioning as judicial officers and are not in a position to receive plaints and applications and dispose of the same, it is necessary that the legislature should intervene and confer the necessary power on the High Court so that persons against whom it is necessary to obtain emergent orders are not allowed to escape on account of the fact that the working of the subordinate judiciary is paralysed because of certain circumstances. The C. M. P. is dismissed. I make no order as to costs. The order of interim injunction is vacated on the ground of want of jurisdiction.