Disposed
Ashok Kumar Bhasin v. Smt Asha Bhasin And Ors.
Jharkhand HCFA/36/2016
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI F.A. No.36…
What the court decided
AI extract
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI F.A. No.36…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI F.A. No.36 of 2016
--------
Ashok Kumar Bhasin …… Appellant Versus Smt. Asha Bhasin & Ors. …… Respondent
------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------For the Appellant : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate For the Respondents : ----------------------------
05 / Dated 09th January, 2020
In view of the amendment in Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts (Jharkhand Amendment) Act, 2018 (Jharkhand Act 09 of 2019), the pecuniary appellate jurisdiction of the District Judge has been enhanced to Rs.25 Lakhs. The said amendment was notified in the Extraordinary Gazette on 11th June, 2019 published on 12th June, 2019. By virtue of the said amendment on amongst the other under Section 21 (1) Clause (a) the word “2 lakhs 50 thousand” has been substituted by “25 lakhs”. Somewhat similar situation arose in the year 2002. Section 21 of the said Act was amended in the year 2002 and the pecuniary appellate jurisdiction of the District Courts were enhanced to Rs.2.50 lakhs. After considering the submissions of the parties by a detail judgment dated 03.10.2002 passed in F.A. No.173 of 1990, this Court held that the intention of the legislature in amending the provisions of the Act was for quick disposal of the appeals, para 13 of the said judgment is quoted hereinbelow:-
“13. The intention of the Legislature in amending the provisions of the Act appears to be mainly for quick disposal of appeals pending in the High Court for the last few decades. Because of acute paucity of time in the High Court, as this Court spends most of its time in deciding criminal appeals and constitutional matters under Article 226 of the Constitution and other relates constitutional provisions, the Legislature in its wisdom thought it proper to increase the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Judges and to empower the High Court to transfer pending appeals arising out of a suit in which the valuation is less than rupees two lacks fifty thousand, so that all such appeals could be disposed of as early as possible.”
Further the Court held that since there is no saving clause the appeals were filed prior to the amendment also needs to be transferred. This Court taken into consideration the proviso of Section 21, which was also incorporated in the year 2002 and come to a conclusion that the cases should
2
be transferred.
In view of the proviso added to Section 21 which gives powers to the High Courts to transfer the appeals which were filed before the amendment of Section 21 and accordingly, this Court comes to a conclusion that the amendment has retrospective effect.
In view of the above facts and circumstances exactly in the similar matter to that of the order passed in F.A. No.173 of 1990, this Court is inclined to transfer this case to the office of the Principal District Judge, Dhanbad which has territorial jurisdiction to hear the appeal or made transfer to the same to the other District Judge.
Accordingly, let the file of this appeal be transferred to the Principal District Judge, Dhanbad. The Principal District Judge, Dhanbad shall issue notice to all the parties before hearing the appeal.
Accordingly the office is directed to transfer this matter as early as possible.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Madhav/-
Ashok Kumar Bhasin
Smt. Asha Bhasin
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court