IN THE MAGISTRATE’S COURT
AT NAUSORI
IN THE CENTRAL DIVISION
REPUBLIC OF FIJI ISLANDS
CIVIL JURISDICTION
Civil Appeal No: 28 of 2014
						   SCT Claim # 741/14

Arishma Devi
								Appellant /Original Respondent
.v.

Ajit Singh
Respondent/Original Claimant

Appearances and Representations
For Appellant:    Mr Raikinikoda
For Respondent   :    In Person

Judgment

1).	Introduction
The Appellant/Original Respondent in this action has appealed the decision of the Referee, dated 1st December 2013 where the Referee had ordered that the Respondent is to pay a sum of $50.00 per month from December 31, 2014 until $3385.00 is paid in full.

The matter was heard on 23rd December 2015.

2).	The Grounds of Appeal
The Appellant grounds for appeal are as follows:

(a) the Referee did not give sufficient consideration to appellants evidence.

(b) the Referee was unfair and only considered the claimants witnesses and did not give appellant time to question the witnesses.

3).	 The Law
Section 33 of the Small Claims Tribunal Decree 1991 provides that:
“(1) Any party to proceedings before a Tribunal appeal against an order made by the Tribunal under section 15(6) or section 31(2) on the grounds that:
(a) the proceedings were conducted by the Referee in a manner which was unfair to the appellant and prejudicially affected the result of the proceedings; or
(b) the Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction.”
The scope of appeals from SCT is extremely limited. The appeal only lies where it can be said that either the proceedings were conducted in a manner which was unfair to the appellant and prejudicially affected the result of the proceedings or the Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction. There can be no appeal on merits: Sheet Metal and Plumbing (Fiji) Limited v. Deo – HBA 7 of 1999.

4).	Observations

The primary concern of this Court is whether the appellant has met the threshold set out in section 33(1) (a) or (b) of the Small Claims Tribunal Decree. 
The Court has noted the grounds of appeal as filed by the Appellant. From the Courts perusal of the records and noting the submissions of the parties the Court finds that the Referee noted all the evidence that was before him. The Referee properly evaluated the evidence before him. He heard all witnesses and the parties and made his decision after hearing them.  
The Court notes that the Referee fairly dealt with the matter. The Referee heard both parties and then decided the matter. The claim was dealt with fairly and the Court finds that the decision that the Referee came up with is after a careful evaluation of all the materials and evidence presented to him.
 5.)    Conclusion
The appellant has not met the threshold set out in section 33(1) (a) & (b) of the Small Claims Tribunal Decree 1991.
 
For the given reasons given above, the appeal fails. Any party aggrieved with this Ruling has the right to appeal to the High Court within 30 days. 

Chaitanya Lakshman 
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE
20th June 2016