DR. AMIT DILIP KUDCHADKAR, THROUGH POA HOLDER, SHRI KEDAR KUDCHADKAR, MAJOR, DOCTOR, R/O. HOUSE NO. 209, ST. JOAQUIM ROAD, MARGAO-GOA Vs. SMT. AMINA KUDCHADKAR ALIAS AMINA NEVREKAR, MAJOR, R/O. NAVELKAR, ORNATE ESTATE, BAINGUINIM, OLD GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CIVIL Revision Application No. 9/2011 and Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 782/2010 are being disposed of by common order since they arise out of same proceedings. Briefly, the facts leading to filing of these proceedings are as under: -

(2.) On 6.10.2004 Dr. Amit Kudchadkar, the respondent in revision application filed the matrimonial petition against the applicant Smt. Amina Kudchadkar, under Article 4(4) of Law of Divorce before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Margao seeking divorce on the ground of desertion and mental cruelty. Applicant contested the proceedings by filing written statement. On 5.12.2007 the applicant filed an application for maintenance which was registered as Exh.D -38. The respondent filed his reply opposing the application. By judgment and order dated 21.1.2008 learned trial Court granted the divorce. Thereafter evidence was led in the application for maintenance by both sides. On 29.6.2010 the learned trial Court partly allowed maintenance application and granted permanent maintenance of Rs. 25,00,000/ -(Rupees Twenty five lakhs only) to the applicant. On 26.7.2010 the respondent preferred Miscellaneous Civil Appeal bearing No. 77/2010, challenging the judgment and order passed by the learned trial Court. On 14.9.2010 the applicant filed an application challenging the jurisdiction of the appellate Court to decide the appeal and contended that the appeal would lie before this Court. The respondent filed his reply opposing the application. By impugned Order dated 20.11.2010 learned Appellate Court dismissed the application filed by the applicant thereby holding that the District Court has jurisdiction to entertain the appeal filed by the respondent. Civil Revision application No. 9/2011 has been filed challenging the said order. The parties hereafter will be referred to as per their status in the revision application.

(3.) MR . Pai learned Counsel for the applicant in Civil Revision Application No. 9/2011 and for the appellant in Appeal from Order No. 35/2010 submitted that lower appellate Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal preferred by the respondent since the applicant had claimed Rs. 75,00,000/ - in the application seeking maintenance.