1. The wife has preferred this appeal under Section 55 of Divorce Act, 1869 challenging the dismissal of application under Section 36 thereof in M.C.No.4066/2013 on the file of Principle Judge, Family Court, Bangalore.

2. The husband Mr. Johny filed a petition under Section 18 of the Divorce Act, 1869 against his wife Mrs. Soumya for a declaration that his marriage be declared null and void on the ground set out therein. After service of notice, even before filing the statement of objections to the main petition, the wife filed an application under Section 36 of the Divorce Act for pendent lite alimony of a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month and Rs.25,000/- towards litigation expenses. The husband did not file any objections to this application. The Family Court, was of view that in the application filed for interim maintenance, the wife has to reveal whether it was her first marriage or second marriage and unless she is lawfully married to the petitioner first time or there was legal termination of the previous marriage, there would be no liability on the part of the petitioner to maintain her and therefore it rejected the application as misconceived. It is against the said order, the present appeal is filed.

3. The question for consideration is,

Whether an appeal lies against an interlocutory order passed by the Family Court in the proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 ?

4. In order to answer the same, we need to examine the various provisions of the Divorce Act, 1869 and also the Family Courts Act, 1984.

5. Section 3(4) of the Divorce Act defines the “Court” as under:

“Court” means the High Court or the District Court, as the case may be:

6. Section 3(3) of the Divorce Act defines the District Court as under:

“District Courts” means, in the case of any petition under this Act, the Court of the District Judge within the local limits of whose ordinary jurisdiction, (or of whose jurisdiction under this act the marriage was solemnized or), the husband and wife reside or last resided together.”

7. Section 18 of the Divorce Act dealing with petition for decree of nullity reads as under:

“Petition for decree of nullity-Any husband or wife may present a petition to the District Court praying that his or her marriage may be declared null and void.”

8. Section 55 of the Divorce Act, 1869 under which this appeal is filed reads as under:

“Enforcement of, and appeal from, orders and decrees.- All decrees and orders made by the Court in any suit or proceeding under this Act shall be enforced and may be appealed from, in the like manner as the decrees and orders of the Court made in the exercise of its original civil jurisdiction are enforced and may be appealed from, under the laws, rules and orders for the time being in force.”

9. The Parliament has enacted the Family Courts Act, 1984 providing for the establishment of Family Courts with a view to promoting conciliation in, and securing speedy settlement of, disputes relating to marriage and family affairs and matters connected therewith; and the said Act came into force w.e.f. 14.09.1984. By virtue of Section 20, the provisions of the said Act have an overriding effect and the said provision reads as under:

“20. Act to have overriding effect- The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force or any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act.”

10. On the date the Act came into force, the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956, the Divorce Act, 1869 and the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 were in force. As the Parliament enacted the special legislation for settlement of disputes relating to marriage and family affairs and the matters connected therewith, by virtue of Section 20 of the Family Courts Act, if there is any inconsistency between the provisions of the Family Courts Act and the above mentioned Acts, the provisions of the Family Court Act wo