By the Court.—This is husband’s appeal. He had initiated proceedings under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for divorce. In the said proceedings issues were framed and the issue No. 3 happened to be with regard to jurisdiction of the Family Court, Allahabad. This issue has been decided as a preliminary issue vide impugned judgment and order dated 19.11.2008 and it has been held that the Court at Allahabad has no jurisdiction and therefore plaint be returned for presentation to proper Court of jurisdiction.

2. The appeal was presented before the Registrar General on 18.2.2009 whereupon the office reported it to be beyond limitation by 53 days as under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 the limitation provided for presenting the appeal is 30 days only. Against this report the appellant has preferred objections contending that basically the appeal is under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act wherein the limitation provided is 90 days and therefore the appeal is within time and the report submitted by the Stamp Reporter treating the appeal to be under Family Courts Act, 1984 is incorrect.

3. We have heard Sri Siddhartha Srivastava in support of the above objections. His submission is that the appeal is under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act read with Section 19 of the Act. Therefore, as the limitation for preferring an appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act is 90 days and that being the special Act, the limitation provided therein would prevail over the one which has been prescribed under the Family Courts Act and as such the report of the Stamp Reporter is incorrect.

4. The period of limitation prescribed for instituting a suit or preferring an appeal or for making an application is governed by the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963 which is of a general nature. Section 3 of the Act provides that every suit instituted, appeal preferred and an application made after the prescribed period of limitation shall be dismissed. However, by virtue of Section 29 sub-clause (2) of the Act where under special or local Act any different period of limitation is prescribed other than mentioned in the schedule attached to the Limitation Act, the same shall hold the field. In other words, in view of Section 29 (2) of the Limitation Act the period of limitation provided in special or local Act would prevail over the period of limitation prescribed in the schedule of the Limitation Act. The three Judges Bench of the Supreme Court in (2008) 7 SCC 169, Consolidated Engineering Enterprises v. Principal Secretary Irrigation Department and others also held that when any special statute prescribes a certain period of limitation, then the period of limitation prescribed under the special law shall prevail and to that extent the provisions of Limitation Act shall stand excluded.

5. Special law is a law which is enacted for special cases, in special circumstances, in contradiction to the general rules of law. For that matter the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is undoubtedly a special law as it has been enacted to deal with the special cases in relation to matrimonial/family disputes amongst the Hindus and with the procedure of settlement of such disputes. It contains not only the substantive law dealing with the grounds for decree of divorce and other matters but also with the procedure including appeals thereof.

6. Initially under Section 28 (4) of the Hindu Marriage Act also the period of limitation for an appeal against the decree passed under the said Act was only 30 days. Subsequently, it appears that in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Savitri Pandey v. Prem Chandra Pandey, (2002) 2 SCC 73 the period of limitation provided therein was increased to 90 days w.e.f., 23.12.2003 vide Act No. 50 of 2003.

7. Subsequently, to ensure speedy disposal of family/matrimonial disputes, the Family Courts Act, 1984 was enacted and enforced providing for the procedure of settlement of such disputes. However,