Indian Bare Acts

Search Alphabatically :

THE BHOPAL AND VINDHYA PRADESH (COURTS), ACT, 1950

Title : THE BHOPAL AND VINDHYA PRADESH (COURTS), ACT, 1950

Year : 1950



Save as otherwise provided by any law for the time being in force, appeals from decrees of Courts exercising original jurisdiction shall lie as follows:-

(a) From a decree of a Munsiff in any suit and of a Subordinate Judge in a suit the value of which does not exceed five thousand rupees, to the Court of the District Judge, and

(b) In all other cases, to the 1*[High Court] :

Provided that the 2*[High Court] with the previous sanction of the
3*[State Government] may, by notification in the Official Gazette direct that appeals lying to the Court of the District Judge from all or any of the decrees passed by a Munsiff in any unclassed suit the value of which does not exceed one hundred rupees shall be preferred to such Subordinate Judge as may be mentioned in the notification, and the appeals shall thereupon be preferred accordingly, and the Court of such Subordinate Judge shall be deemed to be the Court of the District Judge for the purposes of all appeals so preferred.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Substituted by the Adaptation of Laws (No. 2) Order, 1956 for "Judicial Commissioner".

2. Substituted, ibid., for "Chief Commissioner".

3. Substituted, ibid., for "Court of the Judicial Commissioner".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



(1) Save as otherwise provided by any law for the time being in force a second appeal shall lie to the 1*[High Court] in any of the following cases from an appellate decree of a District Court on any ground which would be a good ground of appeal if the decree had been passed in an original suit, namely:-

(a) In a small cause suit or un classed suit-

(i) If the value of the suit is one thousand rupees or upwards, or the decree involves directly some claim to, or question respecting property of like value and the decree of the District Court varies or reverses, otherwise than as to costs, the decree of the Court below, or

(ii) If the value of the suit is two thousand five hundred rupees or upwards, or the decree of the District Court involves directly some claim to, or question respecting, property of like value

(b) In a land suit-

(i) If the value of the suit is two hundred and fifty rupees or upwards or the decree involves directly some claim to, or question respecting, property of like value, and the decree of the District Court varies or reverses, otherwise than as to costs, the decree of the Court below, or

(ii) If the value of the suit is one thousand rupees or upwards, or the decree of the District Court involves directly some claim to, or question respecting, property of like value.

(2) The provisions of Order XLI of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908 (5 of 1908) other than rule 34 of the said Order, shall apply, so far as may be, to a second appeal under this section and to the execution of a decree passed on any such appeal.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Substituted, ibid., for "Court of the Judicial Commissioner".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Subject to the provisions of sections 31 and 34 an appellate decree of a District Court shall be final.



(1) The period of limitation for a second appeal under section. 31 shall be ninety days from the date of the decree appealed against.

(2) In computing such period and in all other respects not here in specified the period of limitation of the appeal shall be governed by the provisions of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908.(9 of 1908)



(1) The 1*[High Court] may call for the record of any case which has been decided by a Civil Court subordinate to it and in which no appeal lies to it, and

(a) If any Civil Court by which the case was decided appears to have exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or to have failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or to have acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction with material irregularity, or

(b) If on an application made to it the 1*[High Court] is of opinion that there is an important question of law or custom involved and that such question requires further consideration, the 1*[High Court] may make such order in the case as it thinks fit:

Provided
that-

(i) No application under clause (b) shall be entertained after in respect of which the application is made unless the applicant satisfies the 1*[High Court] that he had sufficient cause for not making the application within that period,

(ii) No such application shall be admitted in a small, cause suit under the value of one thousand rupees or in an un-classed suit under the value of two hundred rupees,

(iii) On any such application the 1*[High Court] shall not revise the decision of the Court below except in so far as such decision involves a question of law or custom in respect of which the application has been admitted, and

(iv) When any such application has been admitted, the 1*[High Court] shall, subject to proviso (iii), treat the matter of the application, as if it were an appeal.

Explanation.-A question of procedure is not a question of law or custom within the meaning of clause (b).

(2) In computing the period of limitation mentioned in proviso (i) to sub-section (1) and in all other respects not herein specified, the period of limitation of the application shall be governed by the provisions of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908.(9 of 1908)

(3) Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (5 of 1908) shall not apply to the 2*[Divisions] of Bhopal or Vindhya Pradesh.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Substituted by the Adaptation of Laws (No. 2) Order, 1936, for "Court of the Judicial Commissioner".

2. Substituted, Ibid., for "States".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



2* * * * * *

(2) If the 1*[High Court], on an application in respect of which the fee payable 3*[for the exercise of its jurisdiction under section 34] has been paid,sets aside or modifies a decree or order of the Court below or remands the case for a fresh decision, the 1*[High Court] may grant to the applicant a certificate authorizing him to receive back from the Collector of the district in which such Court is situated the full amount of such fee or such part thereof as the 1* [High Court],having regard to the circumstances of the case,may think fit.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Substituted by the Adaptation of Laws (No. 2) Order, 1936, for "Court of the Judicial Commissioner".

2. Sub-section (1) omitted, ibid.

3. Substituted ., ibid, for "under sub-section (1)".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last updated on September, 2016

Find a Lawyer

Legal Hall of Fame

The current Legal Luminaries of India, the credible names in the legal circle along with those who would be the leading stars of the next decade. These are some of the reliable names in field of law. Nominate the Legal Stars of tomorrow

More

Recent Judgment


Sudha Mishra vs. Surya Chandra Mishra( R.F.A 299 of 2014

The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Sudha Mishra vs. Surya Chandra Mishra (R.F.A 299 of 2014)has ruled that a woman has a right over the property of her husband but she cannot claim a right to live in the house of her parents-in-law

More

Bare Acts

Helpline Law provides a user friendly compendium of Indian Law & Bare Acts. Get a complete list & detail of Indian Bare Acts, with amendments and repeals. It comes with easy-to-use features like Search by bare acts & by year. You can even email the information to yourself!

More

Have a Legal Matter ?
Need a Lawyer?

Have a Legal Matter ?

Need a Lawyer?

Male
Female