DEXTER S ANTHONY Vs. JUNE P ANTHONY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE reference in the above Diary No.388 of 1984 raises an interesting question relating to the matrimonial jurisdiction of this Court. THE petitioner presented an application under section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act for the relief of divorce of the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent. In paragraph 6 of the application it is stated as follows: "After the marriage the petitioner and the respondent lived and cohabitated as husband and wife first at Little Mount, Saidapet, Madras, for five years, and then at Gunidy, Madras, for three years and lastly at Kennedy Valley, Moosaranpet, Madras-600 091, until February, 1983, when the respondent left the petitioner in the following circumstances.

(2.) MOOSARANPET is within the jurisdiction of the District Court of Chengalpattu. According to the office note the petition for divorce has to be filed in the District Court within whose jurisdiction both the parties last resided. The office also points out two conflicting judgments of this Court relating to jurisdiction and seeks clarification in the matter. Balasubrahmanyan, J. in Diary No.6509 of 1975, held that in respect of petition under sections 8, 10 and 23 of the Indian Divorce Act, the High Court and the District Court within whose jurisdiction the petitioner and the respondent last resided has got concurrent jurisdiction, disagreeing with the earlier views expressed by Sadasivam, J. and Sethuraman, J. The office also points out another judgment of Fakkir Mohammed, J. in O.M.S.No.l of 1978, holding that in such cases only the District Court has got jurisdiction. In view of the divergence of the views expressed we have to consider the matter in detail and come to a conclusion regarding the question of jurisdiction.

(3.) THE preamble to the Indian Divorce Act 4 of 1969 is as follows: