OAK, C. J. :- These are two execution First appeals. Initially, they came up on 11-2-1969 for admission before a Division Bench of this Court. It was noticed that in each case valuation of the appeal and valuation of the suit in which the appeal arose was below Rs. 20,000. By Act No. 35 of 1968, which came into force on 2-12-1968, appellate jurisdiction of District Judges has been raised to Rs. 20,000. The question, therefore, arose whether these appeals lie to the High Court or to the District Court. It was urged for the appellants that in spite of the passing of Act No. 35 of 1968, these appeals lie to the High Court. In support of this contention, two reasons were advanced on behalf of the appellants. Firstly, it was argued that Act No. 35 of 1968 is unconstitutional. Secondly, even if it is assumed that the Act is constitutional, the present appeals are not governed by Act No. 35 of 1968. These questions are of great importance. The two appeals were, therefore, referred to a Full Bench.

2. Facts, which are relevant on the question of jurisdiction, are these. Execution first appeal No. 32 of 1969 arises out of original suit No. 12 of 1957. Valuation of the suit was Rs. 14,000. The suit was decreed on 7-11-1968. The decree-holder applied for execution. Certain property was sold in execution, and was purchased by Devi Prasad, decree-holder. Keshri Nandan, judgment-debtor filed an objection. The objection was allowed by the Additional Civil Judge, Mirzapur on 16-11-1968. Execution first appeal No. 32 of 1969 has been filed by the legal representatives of Devi Prasad. The appeal was filed on 23-1-1969. Valuation of the appeal is Rs. 14,000.

3. Execution first appeal No. 51 of 1969 has arisen out of original suit No. 55 of 1967. Valuation of the suit was Rupees 13,657-14. During execution proceedings an objection was filed by the judgment-debtor. The objection was allowed by the Civil Judge, Aligarh on 3-1-1969. The execution first appeal is directed against that order. This appeal was filed in this Court on 6-2-1969. Valuation of the appeal is Rs. 13,657.14. It will be noticed that in each case valuation of the suit was below Rs. 20,000; and valuation of the appeal is also below Rs. 20,000.

4. The question of jurisdiction has to be discussed with reference to Act No. 35 of 1968, which was enacted by the President of India (hereafter referred to as the President's Act). It will be convenient to trace the history of legislation, which culminated in the passing of the President's Act. The Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act, 1887 (hereafter referred to as the Civil Courts Act) deals with jurisdiction of Civil Courts. The Civil Courts Act has been amended from time to time. Section 21 of the Civil Courts Act deals with appellate jurisdiction of the High Court and District Judges. According to S. 21 (1) (a), Civil Courts Act, as it originally stood, the maximum limit of jurisdiction of District Judges was Rupees 5,000. By the U. P. Civil Laws (Reforms and Amendment) Act, 1954 (U. P. Act No. 24 of 1954), the limit of jurisdiction of District Courts was raised from Rupees 5,000 to Rs. 10,000.

5. Part XVIII of the Constitution of India contains emergency provisions. Under Art. 356 of the Constitution, the President may issue a Proclamation in case of failure of constitutional machinery in States. Sub-clause (b) of Cl. (1) of Art. 356 provides for a declaration that the powers of the Legislature of the State shall be exercisable by or under the authority of Parliament Art. 357 provides for exercise of legislative powers under Proclamation issued under Art. 356. Article 357 states:

" (1) Where by a Proclamation issued under Cl. (1) of Art. 356, it has been declared that the powers of the Legislature of the State shall be exercisable by or under the authority of Parliament, it shall be competent-

(a) for Parliament to confer on the President the power of the Legislature of the State to make laws............"

By virtue of power conf