NEELAM KUMARI SINHA Vs. SHREE PRASHANT KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) QUESTIONING ? the pregnability of the order dated 19-12- 5 2009 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Siwan in Divorce Case No. 15/05, whereby the said Court had allowed an ad interim maintenance of Rs. 4,500/- per month and litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/- in favour of the petitioner-wife in exercise of powers under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for brevity 'the 1955 Act') and under Section 19(5) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (for short 'the 1984 Act'), the petitioner-wife has preferred the present civil revision invoking the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Before the learned Single Judge, the question of maintainability of the revision was raised on the basis of an order passed on 23-2-2010 in Misc. Appeal No. 654 of 2009 (Anand Kumar Thakur v. Madhuri Kumari) wherein it has been held that a miscellaneous appeal would be the proper remedy under Section 19(1) of the 1984 Act.

(2.) THE learned single Judge, after referring to certain provisions of the Act and the decisions in the field, expressed a doubt with regard to the order passed in Misc. Appeal No. 654 of 2009 and referred the following questions and felt that the controversy should be put to rest by a larger Bench. THE learned single Judge recommended the following issue for adjudication by a larger Bench :- "Whether an appeal would be available under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, against an order passed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?" That is how the matter has been placed before us.

(3.) THE Parliament considering the public interest and the need of the hour thought it apposite to establish Family Courts and conferred with jurisdiction to deal with the disputes with a view to promote conciliation and secure speedy settlement of disputes relating to marriage and family affairs and for matters connected therewith. Section 7 of 1984 Act deals with the jurisdiction of a Family Court. Section 8 deals with the exclusion of jurisdiction and pending proceedings. Section 17 prescribes that a judgment of a Family Court shall contain a concise statement of the case, the point for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for such decision Section 19 provides for appeals and revisions. THE said provision, being relevant for the present proceeding, is reproduced hereinbelow :-