Back
1999 Supreme(MP) 211
1999 (2) JLJ 228
R.P. Gupta, J.
Yasmin Khan (Dr.) v. Sami Ullah Khan
Misc. Appeal No. 78 of 1998; against the order passed by Smt. Chandrakanta
Garg, III Additional District Judge, Bhopal in Civil Suit No. 225-A of 1994;
Decided on 10.3.1999.
I. Hussain for appellant; Kumaresh Pathak for respondent.
Headnote:(1) Civil Courts Act, 1958 (M.P.) -- S. 7 -- Civil P.C., 1908 -- S. 2(4) -- District Court -- is a Principal Court of original jurisdiction of any district. [Para 6]
(2) Civil Courts Act, 1958 (M.P.) -- Ss. 15 and 7(2) -- Court of Additional District Judge -- is distinct from Court of District Judge -- it drives powers from distribution memo prepared by District Judge. 1984 MPLJ SN 2 relied on. [Paras 7 & 8]
(3) Civil Courts Act, 1958 (M.P.) -- S. 15 -- Civil P.C., 1908 -- S. 15 -- distribution memo prepared under the Act -- has force of law -- it has precedence over S. 15 of the Code. [Paras 7, 8 and 11]
¼1½ flfoy U;k;ky; vf/kfu;e] 1958 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 7 && flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk] 1908 && /kkjk 2¼4½ && ftyk U;k;ky; && fdlh Hkh ftys dk ewy vf/kdkfjrk dk iz/kku U;k;ky; gSA ¿ iSjk 6
¼2½ flfoy U;k;ky; vf/kfu;e] 1958 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 15 rFkk 7¼2½ && vfrfjDr ftyk U;k;k/kh‘k dk U;k;ky; && ftyk U;k;k/kh‘k ds U;k;ky; ls lqfHkUu gS && mldh ‘kfDr;k¡ ftyk U;k;k/kh‘k }kjk bl vf/kfu;e ds v/khu rS;kj fd, x, forj.k Kkiu ls O;qRiUu gksrh gSA 1984 ,e ih ,y ts ,l ,u 2 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 7 ,oa 8
¼3½ flfoy U;k;ky; vf/kfu;e] 1958 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 15 && flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk] 1908 && /kkjk 15 && vf/kfu;e ds v/khu rS;kj fd;k x;k forj.k Kkiu && fof/k dk cy izkIr gS && lafgrk dh /kkjk 15 ls vxzrk izkIr gSA ¿ iSjk 7] 8 ,oa 11
1. The only legal question involved in this appeal is whether the Court of Addl. Distt. Judge, Bhopal who tried the suit for divorce filed by a muslim wife against her husband, and the suit was tried from inseption till completion of evidence by the both parties and the matter was fixed for final argument, was not a proper trial and the plaint could be ordered to be returned for presentation in the proper civil Court of lowest jurisdiction in the district i.e. Civil Judge. Class II, as was ultimately directed by the order of the learned Distt. Judge, on objection taken .by the husband respondent at the stage when the case was fixed for final arguments.
2. It may be noticed that the civil suit for seeking divorce by the appellant against the husband was filed. The case was filed before the III Add-I. Distt. Judge, Bhopal as distribution memo prepared by the Distt. Judge in March, 94 under provisions of S. 15 of the MP Civil Courts Act, 1958, directed, under item No.4, that all suits or proceedings between the parties to a marriage for a decree of nullity of marriage or restitution of conjugal rights or judicial separation or dissolution of marriage shall be filed before Shri Gulab Sharma III Addl. Judge to the Court of Distt. Judge, Bhopal. This suit had been filed on 21.10.94 as per this distribution memo. Notice was issued to the defendant who contested on written statement and evidence was led by both the sides and the case reached the final stage for hearing the arguments. Till that time no objection was taken that the jurisdiction was improper and that the suit should• have been filed before Civil Judge, Class II or in the Court of lower jurisdiction than that of Addl. Distt. Judge as the jurisdictional value of the suit has been fixed at Rs. 4001- by the plaintiff himself.
3. At the stage of arguments the husband had applied that as per provisions of S. 15 CPC, a civil suit should be tried by the civil Court of lowest jurisdiction in terms of pecuniary value and so the plaint should be returned. This plea was accepted by the impugned order.
4. In order to appreciate the point involved it will be proper to look into two relevant provisions i.e. S. 15 CPC and S. 15 of MP Civil Courts Act, 1958. These are as under:-
Section 15 CPC -- "Every suit shall be instituted in the Court of the lowest grade competent to try it."
Section 15 of MP. Civil Courts Act, 1958 -- "Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), or the law relating of Courts of small causes, for the time being in force in any area, or in any other provisions contained in this Act, the Distt. Judge, may, by ''Order in writing, direct that any civil business cognizable by his Court or by other Civil Courts established u/S 5, in his civil district, shall be distributed amongst himself and amongst other Courts under his control and amongst Addl. Judges of such other Courts 'inter se' in such manner as he deems fit :
Provided that, except in so far as it may affect the exclusive jurisdiction of a Court of small causes or of a Court invested with the jurisdiction of a Court of small causes, a direction given under this Section shall not empower any Court to exercise powers or deal with business beyond the limits of its pecuniary and notified territorial jurisdiction."
5. A perusal of S. 15 of M.P. Civil Courts Act reveals that it has been worded to be 'notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure or the law relating to the small causes for the time being, in force in any area, or in any other provisions contained in this Act. So this provision is applicable. The interpretation would be that under this S. 15 of M.P. Civil Courts Act, a Distt. Judge can prepare a distribution memo laying down therein which Court shall try which cases. The Court of Distt. Judge is the Principal civil Court of original jurisdiction u/S 7 of the M.P. Civil Courts Act which provides as under:-
"The Court of the Distt. Judge shall be
