Small Cause Court—Jurisdiction of—Whether small cause suits can be tried by the presiding officer of a Court without being specifically empowered by notification to exercise Small Cause Court jurisdiction—Whether Small Cause Court jurisdiction is automatically vested in a Court— Government has been empowered to invest Subordinate Judges and Munsifs with Small Cause Court jurisdiction but that has to be
donç expressly by notification mentioning the individual by names—The jurisdiction cannot be invested by taking the pecuniary jurisdiction as the criterion—It has to be conferred specifically by notification—Civil Courts (Amendment) Ordinance (II of 1983) S.4. Khalilur Rahman Vs. Md. Saidur Rahman; 6 BLD (AD) 303.

The Full Bench considering sections 6, 22, 24 and Order XLVIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, section 8 of the Suit Valuation Act, 1887 as amended by the Civil Courts (Amendment) Act, 2001, sections 8,11,19 and 21 of the Civil Courts Act, 1887 and other relevant provisions of law has come to the conclusion that the District Judge has no jurisdiction to hear the revisional application against the order of the Joint District Judge in a suit the valuation of which is above Tk. 5,00,000 (Taka five lac) and in such matters the revisional application shall lie before the High Court Division under section 115(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure. Bangladesh vs AHM Khurshed Ali 13 BLC (AD) 114

Appeals to a Dist Judge have been provided from a decree or order of a Subordinate Judge or in some cases from that of a Munsif. Ruhul Amin vs District Judge 38 DLR (AD) 172.

Civil Court Act
Jurisdiction of Civil Court—The jurisdiction of the Civil court, whether may be barred expressly or by necessary implication— Under what circumstances such implied ouster takes place.
The jurisdiction of the Civil Court may be expressly barred or it may be barred by necessary implication—Such implied ouster takes place when a special statute provides for a special forum for redress of the grievances, if any, and when the decision of that forum is declared to be final. Chand Miah and ohters Vs. Abdur Razzaque Mahmud Chowdhury and others; 11 BLD (AD) 294.