Back
2022 Supreme(Ker) 447
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J.
Shahanad, S/o Noushad – Appellant
Versus
Shibina D/o. Hussain – Respondent
OP(C) No. 1256 of 2022
Decided on : 18-07-2022
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : V.G.ARUN, NEERAJ NARAYAN, V.JAYA RAGI, R.HARIKRISHNAN (KAMBISSERIL), AVANEETH S.R.
Point of Law : Words, “the High Court may, with approval of Government direct that,” were deleted from 1st proviso of Section 13 by Act 22 of 1973.
Headnote:
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 21 and 227 - Kerala Civil Courts Act, 1957 - Section 13 – Appeal - Protection of life and personal liberty - Appellate jurisdiction of District Court and Subordinate Judge's Court - Right to speedy justice is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of Constitution of India - When statute confers jurisdiction on both District Court and Subordinate Judge's Court, petitioner is given freedom to choose court - Ext.P3 endorsement, ordering return of appeal, is against statute - Whether there is a circular/notification regarding distribution of work among Subordinate Courts in State of Kerala - Words, “the High Court may, with approval of Government direct that,” were deleted from 1st proviso of Section 13 by Act 22 of 1973 (Para 6).
Findings of the Court :
On an analysis of pre-and-post-amended provisions of Section 13 of Act and circular promulgated by this Court, there is no doubt that District Courts and Subordinate Judges' Courts, falling within purview of Section 13 of Act, have concurrent jurisdiction - But, for administrative convenience and equitable distribution of work, High Court has stated in above circular that District Courts may primarily confine to hear appeals from decrees and orders of Subordinate Judges' Courts, and if any time is left over, District Courts may hear and decide appeals from decrees and orders of Munsiff’s
Result : Appeal disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
Can an appeal be directly filed before a District Court, from decrees and orders of a Munsiff Court, when a Subordinate Judge's Court is established at a place other than the station of the District Court, is the question posed for consideration?
2. The skeletal facts relevant for the determination of the original petition are: the petitioner was the defendant in O.S.No.833/2016 of the Court of the Principal Munsiff, Nedumangad, filed by the respondent. The suit was allowed by Ext.P1 judgment. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 memorandum of appeal before the Court of the District Judge, Thiruvananthapuram. The District Courts and the Subordinate Judge's Courts have concurrent jurisdiction to entertain appeals from the decrees and orders of the Munsiff’s Courts in exigencies falling under the 1st proviso to Section 13 of the Kerala Civil Courts Act, 1957 (in short 'Act'). There is a Subordinate Judge's Court at Nedumangad, exercising civil and criminal jurisdiction, but the court is overburdened with work. On the contrary, there are seven District Courts in Thiruvananthapuram, where the work is comparatively lighter than the Subordinate Judge's Court, Nedumangad. Being desirous of having early disposal of the Ext.P.2 appeal, the petitioner had filed the appeal before the District Court, Thiruvananthapuram. Unfortunately, the learned District Judge, by Ext.P3 endorsement, has ordered the return of the appeal to be represented before the Subordinate Judge's Court, Nedumangad, on the ground that it is the notified court. The right to speedy justice is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. When the statute confers jurisdiction on both the District Court and the Subordinate Judge's Court, the petitioner is given the freedom to choose the court. Therefore, Ext.P3 endorsement, ordering the return of the appeal, is against the statute. Hence, the original petition.
3. Heard Sri.Arun V.G., the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
4. The Kerala Civil Courts Act, 1957, came into force on 12.01.1957. Section 13 of the Act, as it originally stood, runs as follows:
13. Appellate jurisdiction of District Court and Subordinate Judge's Court.-Appeals from the decrees and orders of a Munsiff's Court and where the amount or value of the subject matter of the suit does not exceed seven thousand and five hundred rupees, from the original decrees and orders of a Subordinate Judge's Court shall, when such appeals are allowed by law, lie to the District Court:
Provided that whenever a Subordinate Judge's Court is established in any district at a place other than the place where the District Court is stationed, the High Court may, with the approval of the Government, direct that appeals from the decrees or orders of Munsiff's Courts within the local limits of the jurisdiction of such Subordinate Judge's Court be preferred in such Subordinate Judge's Court.
Provided further that the District Court may remove to itself from time to time appeals so preferred and dispose of them itself or may, subject to the orders of the High Court, refer any appeals from the decrees and orders of Munsiff's Courts preferred in the District Court to any Subordinate Judge's Court within the district”.
5. By Act 22 of 1973, published in Kerala Gazette Ext No.677 dated 26.7.1973, the 1st proviso to Section 13 was amended, which now reads thus:
“Provided that whenever the Subordinate Judges' Courts is established in any district at a place other than the place where the District Court is stationed, appeals from the decrees or orders of Munsiff's Courts within the local limits of the jurisdiction of such Subordinate Judges' Court may be preferred in such Subordinate Judge's Court.”
6. The words, “the High Court may, with the approval of the Government direct that,” were deleted from the 1st proviso of Section 13 by Act 22 of 1973.
7. Section 13 of the Act permits appeals from the decrees
