SURAJ BHAN Vs. HARYANA STATE AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A common question, which is likely to arise in appeals (Regular Second Appeals, Regular First Appeals, First Appeal against Orders under the Hindu Marriage Act cases etc.) presented after 1.7.2002, the date from which the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1999 Act")has been enforced relates to the place where the same are to be filed, arises in R.S.A. Nos. 2645, 2703, 3015, 3039, 3043, 3056, 3306 and 3439 of 2002. The same are being disposed of together.

(2.) I have heard Mr. H.S. Hooda, Sr. Advocate, Mr. R.S. Rai, Sr. Central Government Standing Counsel, Mr. R.S. Mittal, Sr. Advocate, Mr. B.B.S. Sobti, Additional Advocate, General, Punjab, Mr. S.K. Vashisth, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana and Mr. M.L. Sarin, Sr. Advocate, who was requested to assist the Court as amicus curiae.

(3.) The controversy, has arisen on account of the amendment in Order 41 Rule 9 of the Code, which reads as under :