M. C. DESAI, AG. C. J.

( 1 ) THE question referred to us in this appeal is whether the appeal lies to this Court or to the court of the District Judge, Kanpur.

( 2 ) THE material facts arc as follows : A petition under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, was filed by the appellant, the husband, against the respondent his wife, in the Court of the district Judge, Kanpur, who transferred it for disposal to the First Civil Judge, Kanpur. No valuation was given on the petition at all. An application for relief under Section 24 of the Act was made before the learned Civil Judge by the wife and ho passed the order under appeal to the effect that further proceeding on the appellants petition would remain stayed so long as he did not pay to the wife the sum of Rs. 250/- for her cost of defending the proceeding as ordered on the 7th April, 1958. The appellant, being aggrieved by the order, preferred this appeal to this Court. The appeal was valued in the memorandum of appeal at Rs. 250/-, The memorandum of appeal was presented before S. N. Sahaj, J. who admitted the appeal, ordered a notice of it to be issued to the respondent, and referred the appeal to a larger Bench for decision of "the question raised". What was the question raised is nowhere mentioned in the order of the learned Judge; nor does he refer to any question raised in the memorandum of appeal. When we asked Shri Satyendra Nath Verma what was the question meant by the learned Judge, he informed us that it was whether the appeal lay to this Court or to the Court of the District judge, Kanpur. The question seems to have been raised by the learned Judge himself. We, therefore, proceed to deal with, the following question :

"does an appeal valued at Rs. 250/- from an order passed under Section 24 of the Hindu marriage Act, 1955, by a Civil Judge, who is a District Court within the meaning of the Act in a proceeding commenced on a petition under Section 10 of the Act, which does not mention any value on the face of it, lie to this Court or to the Court of the District Judge?"

( 3 ) A notice of this appeal was sent to the respondent but she has not appeared before us and we are determining the question ex parte against her.

( 4 ) A petition under Section 10 of the Act is to be presented to the district court which is defined in Section 3 (b) to mean, in an area where there is no city civil court,

"the principal civil court of original jurisdiction, and include any other civil court which may be specified by the State government, by notification in the Official Gazette, as having jurisdiction in respect of the matters dealt with in this Act", vide Section 19. There is no city civil court in Kanpur and the principal civil court of original jurisdiction there is the Court of the District Judge. The State Government has issued a notification in the Official Gazette specifying the Court of the First Civil Judge, Kanpur as having jurisdiction in respect of the matters dealt with in this act. Consequently the Courts of the District Judge and the First Civil Judge have both come within the meaning of the words district Court. We pass by the question why the appellant presented the petition under Section 10 in the Court of the District Judge instead of in the Court of the First Civil Judge and why the learned District Judge accepted it, because the forum of appeal does not depend upon in which court it was presented. Section 28 lays down that an order made by the court in any proceeding under the Act "may be appealed from under any law for the time being in force. "

The court of a civil judge in the State is created under the Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act, 1887. Section 21 of the Act lays down that an appeal from an order of a Civil Judge shall lie to" (a) the District Judge where the value of the original suit in which. . . . . the order was made does not exceed ten thousand rupees, and (b) the High Court in any other case".

A proceeding under Section 10 of the Hindu Ma

Click Here to Read the rest of this document