MANOHAR Vs. BHAURAO S O TUKARAMJI SHIRBHATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE legality and correctness of the order passed by the 2nd Additional District Judge, Amravati on 10th April, 1987 reversing the order passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division. Amravati on 18-2-1983 is under challenge in this revision application.

(2.) THE only contention raised by the learned Senior Counsel for the applicant is that the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati while deciding the petition for probate under section 276 of the Indian Succession Act was discharging the duties of the District Judge and therefore no appeal lay before the District Judge and the judgment passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati on 18th February, 1983 could have only been challenged before the High Court. In this connection, the learned Counsel for the applicant placed reliance on paragraphs 254 and 255 of the Civil Manual.

(3.) PER contra, Mr Udhoji, the learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 submits that since the judgment was passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati in the petition for probate under section 276 of the Indian Succession Act with regard to the will subject matter of which was valued at Rs. 10,000/-, appeal against the judgment could only lie before the District Judge having jurisdiction over the matter and the respondent No. 1 herein rightly challenged the judgment passed by the Civil Judge, SD, Amravati on 18-2-1983 before the District Judge, Amravati who had jurisdiction over the matter. Mr Udhoji in this connection also relied on paragraphs 254 and 255 (old) (new para 305) of the Civil Manual and he also submits that in view of section 388 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, the appeal could lie only before the District Judge and not to this Court as submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicant.