The main legal principle established in the judgment is the determination of the nature of orders as interlocutory, intermediate, or final, and the availability of appeals and revisions for different types of orders under Section 19 of The Family Courts Act, 1984.

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.

1. The scope and ambit of Section 19 of The Family Courts Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the =said Act‘) has to be examined by us in the present appeal.

2. The said Act was enacted with a view to promote conciliation and secure speedy settlement of disputes relating to marriage and family affairs and to deal with matters connected therewith so as to have a composite statute to deal with various aspects. Though the statute was enacted much earlier, its implementation has been done in a phased manner as the pre-requisite was the establishment of the Family Courts under Section 3 of the said Act. For example, in most districts of Delhi such Family Courts now stand established but still not in all. Chapter 5 of the said Act deals with Appeals & Revisions and Section 19 of the said Act is the only Section falling under this chapter which reads as under:

?CHAPTER V - APPEALS AND REVISIONS 19. Appeal. -(1) Save as provided in sub-section (2) and notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908(5 of 1908), or in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), or in any other law, an appeal shall lie from every judgment or order, not being an interlocutory order of a Family Court to the High Court both on facts and on law. (2) No appeal shall lie from a decree or order passed by the Family Court with the consent of the parties or from an order passed under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974): Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any appeal pending before a High Court or any order passed under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), before the commencement of the Family Courts (Amendment) Act, 1991. (3) Every appeal under this section shall be preferred within a period of thirty days from the date of the judgment or order of a Family Court. (4) The High Court may, of its own motion or otherwise, call for and examine the record of any proceeding in which the Family Court situate within its jurisdiction passed an order under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of the order, not being an interlocutory order, and as to the regularity of such proceeding. (5) Except as aforesaid, no appeal or revision shall lie to any Court from any judgment, order or decree of a Family Court. (6) An appeal referred under sub-section (1) shall be heard by a Bench consisting of two or more Judges.?

3. The aforesaid controversy has arisen as the appellant has filed the present appeal to assail the impugned order dated 18.4.2012 passed by the Family Court in exercise of its jurisdiction to grant interim maintenance under the second proviso to Section 125 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the =Cr.P.C.‘) We have examined the scope and ambit of this appeal provision qua the different nature of orders which are passed by the Family Court as no appeal can be filed against a judgement or order of the Family Court which is an interlocutory order [see Section 19 (1) of the said Act] and no appeal lies in respect of an order, inter alia, which is passed under Chapter IX of the Cr.P.C. [see Section 19 (2) of the said Act]. We may note at the threshold that in FAO No.52/2012 titled Preety Bhardwaj Vs. Deepak Kumar Bhardwaj decided on 21.2.2012 passed by a Division Bench of this Court, wherein the judgement was authored by one of us (Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.), the Court dealt with the impact of the absence of Rules under Section 21 of the said Act on the efficacy of the provision of Section 19 (1) read with sub-sections (5) & (6) of Section 19 of the said Act. In that context it was observed that a statutory right of appeal is created under Section 19 (1) of the said Act and such an appeal has to be heard by a Bench consisting of two or more Judges as per Section 19 (6) of the said Act, and the absen