JOSHI
Veena Lodha – Appellant
Versus
Narendra Mal Lodha – Respondent
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. It is contended that the Additional District Judge No. 1, Jodhpur, has no jurisdiction to try the petition under sec 13(1 A)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act as such petition could only be tried by the principal court of original jurisdiction, namely, the District Court, Jodhpur. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that unless (here is a notification of the State Government published in the official gazette authorising any other Civil Court to try the matters under the Hindu Marriage Act, the District Court is the only competent Court to try such matters. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Kuldip Singh Vs. State of Punjab (1) and Janak Dulari vs. Narain Das (2).
4. On the other hand, it is contended by the learned counsel for the non-petitioner that the Additional District Judge has jurisdiction in the instant case as the petition in this case, in the first instance, was presented to the District Judge, who transferred the same to the Additional District Judge.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.