( 1 ) THE appellant Kamuben Bhimabhai was the opponent in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 13 of 1979 which was filed by the respondent Lakhabhai Vithalbhai for divorce under sec. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 The divorce was sought for by the respond-ent on the ground of legal cruelty and desertion for a continuous period exceeding two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition. The learned trial Judge did not grant the relief of divorce to the respondents but instead granted him a decree of judicial separation from the appellant. Hence the present appeal is filed by the appellant.

( 2 ) WHEN the matter was taken up for hearing Mr. G. D. Bhatt the learned Advocate for the respondent herein raised a preliminary objection to the effect that the order of judicial separation was passed by the Extra Assistant Judge Narol and that an appeal from the judgment and order of the Extra Assistant Judge would lie to the District Judge at Narol and not to the High Court. Mr. Bhatt submitted that the present appeal before this Court is not competent. Since the contention raised by Mr. Bhatt related to the question of jurisdiction I heard it as a preliminary issue without going into the merits of the matter.

( 3 ) MR. G. D. Bhatt started his submission by inviting my notice to paragraph 17 of the original application wherein it is stated that for the purpose of court-fees advocate fees and jurisdiction the valuation was made at Rs. 5 and a fixed court-fee stamp of Rs. 37-50 was utilised for the purpose of court-fees. Mr. Bhatt then referred me to secs. 16 24 25 and 26 of the Bombay Civil Courts Act 1869 Sec. 16 reads as under :"16 Original Jurisdiction of Assistant Judge.- The District Judge may refer to any Assistant Judge subordinate to him original suits of which the subject matter is (of any) amount or value (applications or references under Special Acts) and miscellaneous applications. The Assistant Judge shall have jurisdiction to try such suits and to dispose of such applications (or references ). Where the Assistant Judges decrees and orders in such cases are appealable the appeal shall lie to the District Judge or to the High Court according as the amount or value of the subject-matter does not exceed or exceeds twenty thousand rupees".

( 4 ) SEC. 24 of the said Act refers to jurisdiction of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) and jurisdiction of Civil Judge (Junior Division ). It is prescribed that the jurisdiction of a Civil Judge (Senior Division) extends to all original suits and proceedings of a civil nature and the jurisdiction of a Civil Judge (Junior Division) extends to all original suits and proceedings of a civil nature wherein the subject-matter does not exceed in amount or value twenty thousand rupees. Sec. 25 refers to the jurisdiction of Civil Judge (Senior Division) and states that a Civil Judge (Senior Division) in addition to his ordinary jurisdiction shall exercise a special jurisdiction in respect of such suits and proceedings of a civil nature as may arise within the local jurisdiction of the Courts in the district presided over by Civil Judges (Junior Division) and wherein the subject matter exceeds pecuniary jurisdiction of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) as defined by sec. 24. Section 26 of the said Act refers to appeal from the decision of a Senior Division Judge and states that in all suits decided by a Civil Judge of which the amount or value of the Subject-matter exceeds twenty thousand rupees the appeal from his decision shall be direct to the High Court.

( 5 ) MR. Bhatt then referred me to secs. 8 and 9 of the Suit Valuation Act 1887 Section 8 relates to those cases wherein court-fee value and jurisdiction value are to be the same. Sec. 9 is relevant for our purpose. It runs as under :"9 When the subject-matter of suits of any class other than suits mentioned in the Court-fees Act 1870 sec. 7 paragraphs v and vi and paragraph x clause (d) is such that in the opinion of t