Disposed

Sudama Singh And Ors. v. Nand Kishore Singh And Ors.

Jharkhand HC16 Jan 2020FA/76/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order in F.A. Nos. 139 and 76 of 2016 directing transfer of appeals from the High Court to Principal District Judge Ranchi due to enhanced pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Judge following the 2018 Amendment Act, with retrospective effect.

What did the court decide?

Order for transfer of the file of appeals to the Principal District Judge, Ranchi for hearing.

Sudama Singh And Ors. Vs Nand Kishore Singh And Ors. — Company and Corporate | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI F.A. N.139 of 2016

¶3

---

¶4

Mrs. Ranjana Singh & Ors. … Appellants

¶5

-Versus-

¶6

Nand Kishore Singh & Ors. … Respondents

¶7

With F.A. No.76 of 2016 Sudama Singh & Ors. …. Appellants -Versus- Nand Kishore Singh & Ors. ….. ….. Respondents -----

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶9

-----

¶10

For the Appellants : Mr.Dilip Kr. Prasad, Advocate Mr. Badal Vishal, Advocate

¶11

8/ 16.01.2020 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 11^th June, 2019 published on 12^th 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 detailed 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. Paragraph 13 of the said judgment is quoted herein below:-

¶12

“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

¶13

¶14

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.”

¶15

Further the Court held that since there is no saving clause, the appeals 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 be transferred.

¶16

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.

¶17

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, Ranchi which has territorial jurisdiction to hear the appeal or made transfer to the same to the other District Judge.

¶18

Accordingly, let the file of these appeals be transferred to the Principal District Judge, Ranchi. The Principal District Judge, Ranchi shall issue notice to all the parties before hearing the appeals.

¶19

Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

¶20

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶21

SI/

Sudama Singh And Ors. v. Nand Kishore Singh And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudama Singh And Ors. v. Nand Kishore Singh And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kaushalya Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Biga Oraon Vs Sani Oraon AndORS

Ms Corporate Ispat Alloys Ltd. through Its Senior Manager Namely Sadanand Singh Vs Ministry of Coal

Mrs Ranjana Singh And Anr. Vs Nand Kishore Singh And Ors.

Nilesh Kumar Jha Vs Chanda Devi

Ms Banke Bihari Crushers and Pole Pvt. Ltd. through One of Its Directors Sri Deepak Goel Vs Jharkhand State Electricity Board through Its Chairman and Ors.