SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1977 Supreme(P&H) 20

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
O.Chinnappa Reddy, J.
Rama Kanta
Versus
Ashok Kumar
Civil MISCELLANEOUS No. 2 of 1977,
Decided On : JANUARY 31, 1977

Section 21-A of the HMA makes special provision for the transfer of certain proceedings under the HMA and excludes the general provisions in the CPC relating to transfer.

Headnote:

TRANSFER OF PROCEEDINGS - HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 - SECTION 21-A - APPLICABILITY - EXCLUDES GENERAL PROVISIONS IN CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE RELATING TO TRANSFER - SPECIAL PROVISION FOR TRANSFER OF CERTAIN PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE ACT - RENDERS PROVISIONS OF SECTION 21-A SUPERFLUOUS AND MEANINGLESS IF SECTION 24, CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE IS APPLICABLE - APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 24, CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE.

Fact of the Case:

The applicant, the wife of the respondent, filed a petition for divorce in the Court of the District Judge, Chandigarh. The respondent filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights in the Court of the District Judge, Hoshiarpur. The applicant filed an application under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) for transfer of the petition for restitution of conjugal rights to the Court of the Additional District Judge, Chandigarh.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that Section 21-A of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) makes special provision for the transfer of certain proceedings under the HMA and excludes the general provisions in the CPC relating to transfer. Therefore, an application under Section 24 of the CPC is not maintainable.

Issues: Whether Section 21-A of the HMA excludes the general provisions in the CPC relating to transfer.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Surendra Nath V/s. Malati, AIR 1942 Cal 546, which held that Section 8 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (Divorce Act) contains an express provision enabling the High Court to transfer a proceeding under the Divorce Act and excludes the application of Section 24 of the CPC. The court found that Section 21-A of the HMA is similar to Section 8 of the Divorce Act and serves the same purpose.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the application for transfer of the petition for restitution of conjugal rights.

Judgment

1. The applicant is the wife of the respondent. On 29-9-1976, she filed a petition in the Court of the District Judge, Chandigarh, praying for a decree of divorce. The respondent appeared in response to the summons issued to him and filed a written statement. The petition was transferred by the District Judge to the Additional District Judge. Before the Additional District Judge, there was an unsuccessful attempt for reconciliation. Thereafter, the respondent on 3-12-1976 filed a petition in the Court of the District Judge, Hoshiarpur, for restitution of conjugal rights. Alleging that the petition for restitution of conjugal rights has only been filed with a view to harass her, the petitioner has filed the present application under S. 24 of the C.P.C. for transfer of the petition for restitution of conjugal rights now pending in the Court of the District Judge, Hoshiarpur, to the Court of the Additional District Judge, Chandigarh.

2. Shri Y. P. Gandhi, learned counsel for the respondent, has raised a preliminary objection that in view of S. 21-A of the Hindu Marriage Act, no application under S. 24 of the C.P.C. is maintainable. He relies on the decision of a Special Bench of the Calcutta High Court in Surendra Nath V/s. Malati, AIR 1942 Cal 546.

3. Sections 21 and 21-A of the Hindu Marriage Act which are both relevant may be usefully extracted here:"21. Subject to the other provisions contained in this Act and to such rules as the High Court may make in this behalf, all proceedings under this Act shall be regulated as far as may be, by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

21-A. Power to transfer petitions in certain cases. (1) Where (a) a petition under this Act has been presented to a district court having jurisdiction by a party to a marriage praying for a decree for judicial separation under S. 10 or for a decree of divorce under S. 13, and

(b) another petition under this Act has been presented thereafter by the other party to a marriage praying for a decree for judicial separation under S. 10 or for a decree of divorce under S. 13 on any ground, whether in the same district court or in a different district court, in the same State or in a different State, the petition shall be dealt with as specified in sub-sec. (2).

(2) In a case where sub-sec. (1) applies,- (a) if the petitions are presented in the same district, both the petitions shall be tried and heard together by that district court;

(b) if the petitions are presented to different district courts, the petition presented later shall be transferred to the district court in which the earlier petition was presented and both the petitions shall be heard and disposed of together by the district court in which the earlier petition was presented.

(3) In a case where cl. (b) of sub-s. (2) applies, the court or the Government, as the case may be, competent under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) to transfer any suit or proceeding from the district court in which the later petition has been presented to the district court in which the earlier petition is pending, shall exercise its powers to transfer such later petition as if it had been empowered so to do under the said Code."

Section 21-A makes special provision for the transfer of certain proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act. By virtue of S. 21, it is to be taken that this special provision excludes the general provisions in the Civil P. C. relating to transfer. The learned counsel for the applicant argued that S. 21-A would apply only to the situations mentioned therein and that other situations would continue to be governed by S. 24 of the Civil P. C. To accept the contention of the learned counsel would be to render the provisions of S. 21-A superfluous and practically meaningless since what can be done under S. 21-A of the Hindu Marriage Act could always be done under S. 24, C.P.C. and there would be no point in S. 21-A of the Hindu Marriage Act governing some situation and S. 24, C.P.C. governing


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top