Baleshwar Prasad Singh & Ors vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 507 Jhar

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)
                                  F.A. No. 24 of 2004
                                  ......

Baleshwar Prasad Singh & Ors. ...... Appellants Versus The State of Bihar, Now State of Jharkhand & Ors. ......Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO (Through : Video Conferencing) ......

        For the Appellants                  : Mr. Subham Kr. Mishra, Advocate
        For the Respondents                 :
                                    -----
15/Dated: 03/02/2021.

Learned counsel, Mr. Subham Kr. Mishra on the instruction of learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. T.K. Mishra has submitted that the First Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 11.06.2004 passed by learned Sub-Ordinate Judge-Ist, Dhanbad in Title Suit No.78 of 1987.

The appeal was filed on 19.07.2004 and vide order dated 30.08.2010 the appeal was admitted and LCR was called for.

In the meantime, there is amendment in Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts (Jharkhand Amendment) Act, 2018 (Jharkhand Act 09 of 2019), whereby the pecuniary appellate jurisdiction of the District Judge has been enhanced to Rs.25 Lakhs. The said amendment was notified in the extraordinary Gazette on 11th June 2019 vide Notification No.LG-04/2018-251/Leg and published on 12th June 2019. By virtue of the said amendment in Section 21(1) of (Act 12 of 1887) words "2 Lac 50 Thousand" has been substituted by "25 Lac", as such, this Court may remit this appeal before the District court as the co-ordinate Bench of this Court is passing such orders.

Nobody appears on behalf of the respondents to assist this Court. This Court is prima facie not accepting this argument on the ground that such amendment has no retrospective effect. Once the appeal has been admitted and the LCR has been called for and the parties have appeared, but because of pendency of the appeal before the High Court subsequent amendment made in pecuniary jurisdiction cannot be the ground to remit the case before the District court.

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that four weeks time may be granted to assist this Court properly.

Put up this case after four weeks.

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.) sandeep/R.S-