Patna High Court
Benazir Hasan vs Md. Rayeesul Azam on 19 September, 2023
Author: P. B. Bajanthri
Bench: P. B. Bajanthri, Arun Kumar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Appeal No.389 of 2023
======================================================
Benazir Hasan W/o late Md. Ruhe Nadim Azam, D/o Tanvir Hasan, Resident
of S.N. Singh Road, Near D.I.G. Kothi, Khanjarpur, P.S.- Barari, District-
Bhagalpur.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Md. Rayeesul Azam S/o Abdus Salam, Resident of Village and P.O.-
Badharwa Fatheh Mohammad, P.S.- Kundwa Chainpur, District- East
Champaran, Temporary resident of Qtr. No. D-4, P and T Colony, Gopinath
Bazar, New Delhi, Pin 110010.
2. Bibi Ruhi Anjum W/o Md. Rayeesul Azam, Resident of Village and P.O.-
Badharwa Fatheh Mohammad, P.S.- Kundwa Chainpur, District- East
Champaran, Temporary resident of Qtr. No. D-4, P and T Colony, Gopinath
Bazar, New Delhi, Pin 110010.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Diwakar Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Asif Kalim, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI)
Date : 19-09-2023
The present Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by
the respondent under Section 19(1) of Family Court Act, 1984
against order passed in Guardianship Case No. 06/2022 by
learned Principal Judge, Family Court, East Champaran,
Motihari. The appellant's contention is that the aforementioned
case was admitted and O.C. was directed to issue notice, which
reads as under:-
"23.05.2022: Petitioner is in attendance
heard case is hereby admitted O.C. to
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
2/21
issue notice against O.P. through Nazarat
Civil Court, Motihari put up on 13.07.22
for appearance of O.P."
02. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that
Family Court, Motihari has no jurisdiction to entertain
respondents' Guardianship Case No. 06/2022 to the extent that
Family Court, Motihari has no territorial jurisdiction. Therefore,
admission of the aforementioned case and further proceedings is
without authority of law. Hence, the present Miscellaneous
Appeal is filed.
03. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are parents of the
deceased Md. Ruhe Nadim Azam and the father-in-law and
mother-in-law of appellant. Appellant married deceased Md.
Ruhe Nadim Azam on 13.04.2019. Appellant gave birth to a
baby boy on 22.01.2020. He has been named as Arhan Azam.
Md. Ruhe Nadim Azam died on 10.03.2021 while working as
Specialist Officer (Civil Engineer), S.B.I. Zonal Office,
Bhagalpur. In this backdrop, respondent nos.1 and 2 have filed
application under Section 10 of the Guardian and Wards Act,
1890 (in short "G and W Act"). Application was registered as
Case No.06 of 2022 on the file of Principal Judge, Family Court
at Motihari, East Champaran. The reliefs sought by the
respondent nos.1 and 2 are as under:
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
3/21
"A. The petitioner no.1 be declared as legal
guardian of the minor Arhan Azam.
B. The O.P. be disqualified for the custody of
the minor Arhan Azam.
C. In consequences of relief No.B, O.P. be
direcrted to handover the custody of minor
Arhan Azam to the petitioners.
D. Any other relief or reliefs for which the
court be deems fit proper be granted to the
petitioner."
04. Appellant herein filed the written statement by
way of objection petition in which she has prayed for as under:
"It is therefore respectfully prayed that the
court be pleased to my transfer the said
petition would be disposed of more justly
leave convently to the Principal Judge, Civil
Court Bhagalpur having jurisdiction to try
the above noted petition where the opposite
party with her minor sons having residing for
ends of kindness to by rejected the petition
with special cost.
And for this act kindness the opposite party
shall ever pray." (sic)
05. Before adverting to the factual aspect of the
matter, it is necessary to reproduce certain statutory provisions
of the Guardian and Wards Act. Sections 9, 10, 11, 13 and 47 of
G and W Act read as under:
"9. Court having jurisdiction to
entertain application.--(1) If the
application is with respect to the
guardianship of the person of the minor, it
shall be made to the District Court
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
4/21
having jurisdiction in the place where the
minor ordinarily resides.
(2) If the application is with respect to the
guardianship of the property of the minor,
it may be made either to the District
Court having jurisdiction in the place
where the minor ordinarily resides or to a
District Court having jurisdiction in a
place where he has property.
(3) If an application with respect to the
guardianship of the property of a minor is
made to a District Court other than that
having jurisdiction in the place where the
minor ordinarily resides, the Court may
return the application if in its opinion the
application would be disposed of more
justly or conveniently by any other
District Court having jurisdiction.
(Under line supplied)
10. Form of application.--(1) If the
application is not made by the Collector,
it shall be by petition signed and verified
in manner prescribed by the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1882 for the signing and
verification of a plaint, and stating, so far
as can be ascertained--
(a) the name, sex, religion, date of birth
and ordinary residence of the minor;
(b) where the minor is a female, whether
she is married, and, if so, the name and
age of her husband;
(c) the nature, situation and approximate
value of the property, if any, of the minor
(d) the name and residence of the person
having the custody or possession of the
person or property of the minor;
(e) what near relations the minor has,
and where they reside;
(f) whether a guardian of the person or
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
5/21
property, or both, of the minor has been
appointed by any person entitled or
claiming to be entitled by the law to
which the minor is subject to make such
an appointment;
(g) whether an application has at any
time been made to the Court or to any
other Court with respect to the
guardianship of the person or property, or
both, of the minor, and, if so, when, to
what Court and with what result;
(h) whether the application is for the
appointment or declaration of a guardian
of the person of the minor, or of his
property, or of both;
(i) where the application is to appoint a
guardian, the qualifications of the
proposed guardian;
(j) where the application is to declare a
person to be a guardian, the grounds on
which that person claims;
(k) the causes which have led to the
making of the applications; and
(l) such other particulars, if any, as may
be prescribed or as the nature of the
application renders it necessary to state.
(2) If the application is made by the
Collector, it shall be by letter addressed
to the Court and forwarded by post or in
such other manner as may be found
convenient, and shall state as far as
possible the particulars mentioned in sub-
section (1).
(3) The application must be accompanied
by a declaration of the willingness of the
proposed guardian to act, and the
declaration must be signed by him and
attested by at least two witnesses.
(Under line supplied)
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
6/21
11. Procedure on admission of
application.--(1) If the Court is satisfied
that there is ground for proceeding on the
application, it shall fix a day for the
hearing thereof, and cause notice of the
application and of the date fixed for the
hearing--
(a) to be served in the manner directed in
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1882, on--
(i) the parents of the minor if they arc
residing in [any State to which this Act
extends],
(ii) the person, if any, named in the
petition or letter as having the custody or
possession of the person or property of
the minor,
(iii) the person proposed in the
application or letter to be appointed or
declared guardian, unless that person is
himself the applicant, and
(iv) any other person to whom, in the
opinion of the Court, special notice of the
application should be given; and
(b) to be posted on some conspicuous
part of the court-house, and of the
residence of the minor, and otherwise
published in such manner as the Court,
subject to any rules made by the High
Court under this Act, thinks fit.
(2) The [State] Government may, by
general or special order, require that,
when any part of the property described
in a petition under section 10, sub-section
(1), is land of which a Court of Wards
could assume the superintendence, the
Court shall also cause a notice as
aforesaid to be served on the Collector in
whose district the minor ordinarily
resides, and on every Collector in whose
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
7/21
district any portion of the land is situate,
and the Collector may cause the notice to
be published in any manner he deems fit.
(3) No charge shall be made by the Court
or the Collector for the service or
publication of any notice served or
published under sub-section (2).
13. Hearing of evidence before making
of order.--On the day fixed for the
hearing of the application, or as soon
afterwards as may be, the Court shall
hear such evidence as may be adduced in
support of, or in opposition to, the
application.
47. Orders appealable.-- An appeal shall
lie to the High Court from an order made
by a [*]Court,--
(a) under section 7, appointing or
declaring or refusing to appoint or
declare a guardian; or
(b) under section 9, sub-section (3),
returning an application; or
(c) under section 25, making or refusing to
make an order for the return of a ward to
the custody of his guardian; or
(d) under section 26, refusing leave for, the
removal of award from the limits of the
jurisdiction of the Court, or imposing
conditions with respect thereto; or
(e) under section 28 or section 29, refusing
permission to a guardian to do an act
referred to in the section; or
(f) under section 32, defining, restricting or
extending the powers of a guardian; or
(g) under section 39, removing a guardian ;
or
(h) under section 40, refusing to discharge
a guardian; or
(i) under section 43, regulating the conduct
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
8/21
or proceedings of a guardian or settling a
matter in difference between joint
guardians, or enforcing the order ; or
(j) under section 44 or section 45, imposing
a penalty.
Similarly, some of the statutory provisions of the
Family Courts Act like Section 7(g), Section 17 and Section 19
are as follows:-
"7. Jurisdiction - (1)--------------------------
(a)-------------------------------------------------
(g) a suit or proceeding in relation to the
guardianship of the person or the custody
of, or access to, any minor.
17. Judgment.--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.
19. Appeal.--(1) Save as provided in sub-
section (2) and notwithstanding anything
contained in the Code of Civil
Procedure,1908 (5 of 1908) or in the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or
in any other law, an appeal shall lie from
every judgment or order, not being an
interlocutory order, of a Family Court to
the High Court both on facts and on law.
(2) No appeal shall lie from a decree or
order passed by the Family Court with the
consent of the parties [or from an order
passed under Chapter IX of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974):
Provided that nothing in this sub-section
shall apply to any appeal pending before a
High Court or any order passed under
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
9/21
Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) before the
commencement of the Family Courts
(Amendment) Act, 1991 (59 of 1991).]
(3) Every appeal under this section shall be
preferred within a period of thirty days from
the date of the judgment or order of a
Family Court.
[(4) The High Court may, of its own motion
or otherwise, call for and examine the
record of any proceeding in which the
Family Court situate within its jurisdiction
passed an order under Chapter IX of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of
1974) for the purpose of satisfying itself as
to the correctness, legality or propriety of
the order, not being an interlocutory order,
and as to the regularity of such
proceeding.]
[(5)] Except as aforesaid, no appeal or
revision shall lie to any court from any
judgment, order or decree of a Family
Court.
[(6)] An appeal preferred under sub-
section(1) shall be heard by a Bench
consisting of two or more Judges."
(Under line supplied)
06. The petitioner has questioned the order-sheet
dated 23.05.2022 in Guardianship Case No.06 of 2022 on the
file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, East Champaran,
Motihari and it reads as under:
"Petitioner is in attendance Heard
case is hereby admitted O.C. to issue notice
against O.P. through nazarat Civil Court,
Motihari, put up on 13.7.22 for appearance
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
10/21
of O.P."
07. The appellant has assailed the aforementioned
order-sheet dated 23.05.2022 by contending that Principal
Judge, Family Court, Motihari, East Champaran, has no
jurisdiction to decide the Guardianship Case No.06 of 2022 filed
on behalf of the respondent nos.1 and 2 on the jurisdictional
point. In fact, such contention has been taken in the written
statement filed before the Family Court. However, no order has
been passed in the Guardianship Case No.06 of 2022 insofar as
territorial jurisdiction in the Family Court, East Champaran,
Motihari.
08. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the present Miscellaneous Appeal is maintainable in view of the
fact that Family Court, East Champaran, Motihari, has no
territorial jurisdiction on the score that minor Arhan Azam is
residing with the appellant Benazir Hasan, who is minor's
natural single parent at Khanjarpur, P.S. Barari, District-
Bhagalpur and it is submitted that in terms of sub Section (1) of
Section 9 of G and W Act, respondents should have preferred
Guardianship case in the territorial jurisdiction of Bhagalpur
District and not in East Champaran at Motihari. It is further
submitted that Miscellaneous Appeal No.389 of 2023 is
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
11/21
maintainable under Section 7 read with Section 19 of the Family
Courts Act.
09. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents
resisted the aforementioned contentions and submitted that
Miscellaneous Appeal No.389 of 2023 is not maintainable
against the Order-sheet dated 23.05.2022 in view of sub Section
1 of Section 19 of the Family Courts Act. It is also submitted
that order dated 23.05.2022 of the Family Court is not an order
(Final Order or Judgment) in the light of sub Section 14 of
Section 2 of the CPC read with sub Section (2) of Section 9. It
relates to Order and Judgment, whereas the impugned order-
sheet is not a final Order or Judgment so as to entertain the
present Miscellaneous Appeal No.389 of 2023 under Section
19(1) of the Family Courts Act.
10. Heard the learned counsel for the respective
parties.
11. Core issue involved in the present lis is whether
the present Miscellaneous Appeal No.389 is maintainable in
view of the language employed under Sections 7 and 19(1) of
the Family Courts Act or not? Section 7(g) empowers the
Family Court to decided the guardianship issue. Sub Section 1
of Section 19, appeal against the Family Court could be
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
12/21
entertained only against the final order/Judgment. In fact, there
is a bar in filing of Miscellaneous Appeal against the
interlocutory order.
12. Perusal of the impugned order dated 23.05.2022, it
is crystal clear that it is order-sheet maintained by the Family
Court in the light of Section 11-Procedure on Admission of
Application under G and W Act. Thereafter, hearing of the
evidence before making order under Section 13 of G and W Act
has not reached at that stage in Guardianship Case No.06 of
2022 so as to entertain the present Miscellaneous Appeal
No.389 of 2023.
13. At this stage, it is necessary to take note of
meaning of 'order' and 'interlocutory order' from the Black's
Law Dictionary which read as under:-
"order, n. 1. A command, direction, or
instruction. See MANDATE (1). 2. A written
direction or command delivered by a court
or judge. The word generally embraces final
decrees as well as interlocutory di-rections
or commands. Also termed court order;
judicial order. See MANDAMUS. [Cases:
Federal Civil Procedure 928; Motions 46.
C.J.S. Motions and Orders §§ 1-3, 13, 50,
59.]
"An order is the mandate or
determination of the court upon some
subsidiary or collateral matter arising in an
action, not disposing of the merits, but
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
13/21
adjudicating a preliminary point or
directing some step in the proceed- ings." 1
Henry Campbell Black, A Treatise on the
Law of Judgments § 1, at 5 (2d ed. 1902).
"While an order may under some
circumstances amount to a judgment, they
must be distinguished, owing to the different
consequences flowing from them, not only in
the matter of enforcement and appeal but in
other respects, as, for instance, the time
within which proceedings to annul them
must be taken. Rulings on motions are
ordinarily orders rather than judgments.
The class of judgments and of decrees
formerly called interlocutory is included in
the definition given in [modern codes] of the
word 'order.'" 1 A.C. Freeman, A Treatise of
the Law of Judgments § 19, at 28 (Edward
W. Tuttle ed., 5th ed. 1925).
interlocutory order (in-tər-lok-yə-tor-ee).
An order that relates to some intermediate
matter in the case; any order other than a
final order. Most interlocutory orders are
not appealable until the case is fully
resolved. But by rule or statute, most
jurisdictions allow some types of
interlocutory orders (such as preliminary
injunctions and class- certification orders)
to be immediately appeal- ed. -- Also
termed interlocutory decision; interim
order; intermediate order. See appealable
decision under DECISION; COLLATERAL-
ORDER DOCTRINE. [Cases: Appeal and
Error 67; Federal Courts 572, 576; Motions
51. C.J.S. Appeal and Error § 84; Motions
and Orders §§ 2, 52-53, 55.]"
14. It is to be noted that final order has to be
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
14/21
interpreted in contradistinction to an interlocutory order; and the
test for determining the finality of an order is whether Judgment
or order finally disposed of the rights of the parties. If an order
which does not determine the rights of the parties but is only on
certain aspect of the suit or the trial is an interlocutory order;
that the concept of the interlocutory order has to be explained in
contradistinction to a final order. In other words, if an order is
not a final order, it would be an interlocutory order. Therefore,
the impugned order is not appealable under Section 19(1) of the
Family Courts Act. There is no concept of order other than
interlocutory order or final order. The impugned order would
fall in the nature of interlocutory order. Consequently, the
present Miscellaneous Appeal is not maintainable.
15. Section 47 of the G and W Act relates to
appealable orders. We have quoted various Sections but
Section 11, Procedure on Admission of Application, is not part
and parcel of Section 47.
16. In Balram Yadav v. Fulmaniya Yadav, (2016) 13
SCC 308: AIR 2016 SC 2161, the Apex Court while
considering the scope of section 7 of the Family Courts Act
observed that the Family Courts Act has an overriding effect. A
plain reading of sub section (1) of Section 19 makes it clear that
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
15/21
no appeal lies against interlocutory orders passed under the
Family Courts Act.
17. The scope of 'Judgment' and 'interlocutory order'
has been distinguished time and again by the Apex Court. In
Shah Babulal Khimji v. Jayaben D. Kama, (1981) 4 SCC 8 :
AIR 1981 SC 1786, the Hon'ble Supreme Court discussed the
scope of 'interlocutory order' and the expression 'judgment'
which was assigned a wider meaning and has extended the
scope of right of appeal where the characteristics and trappings
of the finality of the issue is available. The relevant paras 113-
115 reads as under:--
"113. Thus, under the Code of Civil
Procedure, a judgment consists of the
reasons and grounds for a decree passed by
a court. As a judgment constitutes the
reasons for the decree it follows as a matter
of course that the judgment must be a
formal adjudication which conclusively
determines the rights of the parties with
regard to all or any of the matters in
controversy. The concept of a judgment as
defined by the Code of Civil Procedure
seems to be rather narrow and the
limitations engrafted by sub-section (2) of
Section 2 cannot be physically imported
into the definition of the word "judgment"
as used in clause 15 of the letters patent
because the letters patent has advisedly not
used the terms "order" or "decree"
anywhere. The intention, therefore, of the
givers of the letters patent was that the
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
16/21
word "judgment" should receive a much
wider and more liberal interpretation than
the word "judgment" used in the Code of
Civil Procedure. At the same time, it cannot
be said that any order passed by a trial
Judge would amount to a judgment;
otherwise there will be no end to the
number of orders which would be
appealable under the letters patent. It
seems to us that the word "judgment" has
undoubtedly a concept of finality in a
broader and not a narrower sense. In other
words, a judgment can be of three kinds:
(1) A final judgment.- A judgment which
decides all the questions or issues in
controversy so far as the trial Judge is
concerned and leaves nothing else to be
decided. This would mean that by virtue of
the judgment, the suit or action brought by
the plaintiff is dismissed or decreed in part
or in full. Such an order passed by the trial
Judge indisputably and unquestionably is a
judgment within the meaning of the letters
patent and even amounts to a decree so that
an appeal would lie from such a judgment
to a Division Bench.
(2) A preliminary judgment. - This kind of a
judgment may take two forms-(a) where the
trial Judge by an order dismisses the suit
without going into the merits of the suit but
only on a preliminary objection raised by
the defendant or the party opposing on the
ground that the suit is not maintainable.
Here also, as the suit is finally decided one
way or the other, the order passed by the
trial Judge would be a judgment finally
deciding the cause so far as the Trial Judge
is concerned and therefore appealable to
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
17/21
the larger Bench, (b) Another shape which
a preliminary judgment may take is that
where the trial Judge passes an order after
hearing the preliminary objections raised
by the defendant relating to maintainability
of the suit, e.g., bar of jurisdiction, res
judicata, a manifest defect in the suit,
absence of notice under Section 80 and the
like, and these objections are decided by the
trial Judge against the defendant, the suit is
not terminated but continues and has to be
tried on merits but the order of the trial
Judge rejecting the objections doubtless
adversely affects a valuable right of the
defendant who, if his objections are valid, is
entitled to get the suit dismissed on
preliminary grounds. Thus, such an order
even though it keeps the suit alive,
undoubtedly decides an important aspect of
the trial which affects a vital right of the
defendant and must, therefore, be construed
to be a judgment so as to be appealable to a
larger Bench.
(3) Intermediary or interlocutory judgment-
Most of the interlocutory orders which
contain the quality of finality are clearly
specified in clauses (a) to (w) of Order 43
Rule 1 and have already been held by us to
be judgments within the meaning of the
letters patent and, therefore, appealable.
There may also be interlocutory orders
which are not covered by Order 43 Rule 1
but which also possess the characteristics
and trappings of finality in that, the orders
may adversely affect a valuable right of the
party or decide an important aspect of the
trial in an ancillary proceeding : Before
such an order can be a judgment the
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
18/21
adverse effect on the party concerned must
be direct and immediate rather than
indirect or remote. For instance, where the
trial Judge in a suit under Order 37 of the
Code of Civil Procedure refuses the
defendant leave to defend the suit, the order
directly affects the defendant because he
loses a valuable right to defend the suit and
his remedy is confined only to contest the
plaintiff's case on his own evidence without
being given a chance to rebut that evidence.
As such an order vitally affects a valuable
right of the defendant it will undoubtedly be
treated as a judgment within the meaning of
the letters patent so as to be appealable to a
larger Bench. Take the converse case in a
similar suit where the trial Judge allows the
defendant to defend the suit in which case
although the plaintiff is adversely affected
but the damage or prejudice caused to him
is not direct or immediate but of a minimal
nature and rather too remote because the
plaintiff still possesses his full right to show
that the defence is false and succeed in the
suit. Thus, such an order passed by the trial
Judge would not amount to a judgment
within the meaning of clause 15 of the
letters patent but will be purely an
interlocutory order. Similarly, suppose the
trial Judge passes an order setting aside an
ex parte decree against the defendant,
which is not appealable under any of the
clauses of Order 43 Rule I though an order
rejecting an application to set aside the
decree passed ex parte falls within Order
43 Rule 1 clause (d) and is appealable, the
serious question that arises is whether or
not the order first mentioned is a judgment
within the meaning of letters patent. The
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
19/21
fact, however, remains that the order setting
aside the ex parte decree puts the defendant
to a great advantage and works serious
injustice to the plaintiff because as a
consequence of the order, the plaintiff has
now to contest the suit and is deprived of
the fruits of the decree passed in his favour.
In these circumstances, therefore, the order
passed by the trial Judge setting aside the
ex parte decree vitally affects the valuable
rights of the plaintiff and hence amounts to
an interlocutory judgment and is therefore,
appealable to a larger Bench."
114. In the course of the trial, the trial
Judge may pass a number of orders
whereby some of the various steps to be
taken by the parties in prosecution of the
suit may be of a routine nature while other
orders may cause some inconvenience to
one party or the other, e.g., an order
refusing an adjournment, an order refusing
to summon an additional witness or
documents, an order refusing to condone
delay in filing documents, after the first
date of hearing an order of costs to one of
the parties for its default or an order
exercising discretion in respect of a
procedural matter against one party or the
other. Such orders are purely interlocutory
and cannot constitute judgments because it
will always be open to the aggrieved party
to make a grievance of the order passed
against the party concerned in the appeal
against the final judgment passed by the
trial Judge.
115. Thus, in other words every
interlocutory order cannot be regarded as a
judgment but only those orders would be
Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023
20/21
judgments which decide matters of moment
or affect vital and valuable rights of the
parties and which work serious injustice to
the party concerned. Similarly, orders
passed by the trial Judge deciding question
of admissibility or relevancy of a document
also cannot be treated as judgments
because the grievance on this score can be
corrected by the appellate court in appeal
against the final judgment."
18. In view of Section 19(1) of Family Courts Act,
appeal is maintainable only against the final judgment or order
passed by the Family Court. In the present case, there is no final
order or judgment so as to entertain the present Miscellaneous
Appeal.
19. Hence, the present Miscellaneous Appeal is not
maintainable.
20. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant is
insisting to entertain the present Misc. Appeal.
21. Having regard to the nature of the order
23.05.2022passed by the Family Court cited (supra), we are not satisfied in the light of the fact that impugned order in the present Misc. Appeal is in the form of interlocutory in nature.
22. In view of these facts and circumstances, at best, petitioner is at liberty to insist the Family Court to decide the preliminary issue, insofar as maintainability of the respondents' Patna High Court MA No.389 of 2023 dt.19-09-2023 21/21 petition filed under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 is concerned.
23. The Family Court is requested to decide the preliminary issue relating to maintainability of the petition filed by the respondents before taking up of any further proceedings in Guardianship Case No. 06 of 2022, in accordance with law.
24. Accordingly, the present Miscellaneous Appeal stands dismissed.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J) (Arun Kumar Jha, J) Ashish/-
P.S./-
AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 26.09.2023 Transmission Date NA