Allahabad High Court
RAM MURARI PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P.AND OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The appeal is maintainable before the District Judge and must be transferred to that court for hearing on merits.
Summary
The appellant, Ram Murari Pandey, filed an appeal under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code against a decree of the Ist Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) dated 26 July 2007, which partially decreed his money suit. The appeal was filed 1 year and 269 days after the decree, but the suit’s valuation was Rs.16,99,921, i.e., below the Rs.25,00,000 threshold, making the appeal maintainable before the District Judge of Farrukhabad. The High Court noted that another appeal (State of U.P. vs. Ram Dular) had been erroneously retained before it despite being transferred to the District Judge. Consequently, the Court directed that the present appeal be sent to the District Judge, Farrukhabad for merits hearing, after hearing both parties. No substantive merits were decided; the order was purely procedural.
Issues considered
- Whether an appeal filed after a delay of 1 year and 269 days under Section 96 CPC is maintainable given the suit valuation below Rs.25 lakh.
- Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear the appeal or it should be decided by the District Judge.
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 96
Subjects
- Civil Procedure Code
- Section 96
- appeal
- jurisdiction
- transfer
- delay
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
FIRST APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 135 of 2009
Ram Murari Pandey
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P.And Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) : Haider Husain
Counsel for Respondent(s) :
Court No. - 38by the by the
HON'BLE SANDEEP JAIN, J.
1. Case called out. No one appears to press this appeal.
2. The instant appeal has been filed with delay of 1 year and 269 days
under Section 96 C.P.C. against the impugned judgment and decree dated
26.07.2007 passed by the Ist Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division),
Court No.8, Farrukhabad in O.S. No.2 of 2004 (Ram Murari Pandey vs.
State of U.P. and others), whereby plaintiff's money suit has been
partially decreed.
3. It appears that the valuation of the suit is only Rs.16,99,921/-, which is
below Rs.25,00,000/-, as such, the appeal under Section 96 C.P.C. against
the impugned judgment and decree is maintainable before the District
Judge, Farrukhabad.
4. It also appears that the State had also filed Appeal No.21 of 2016 (State
of U.P. vs. Ram Dular), before this Court, which has already been
transferred to District Judge, Farrukhabad vide order dated 13.06.2016,
but erroneously this appeal remained pending before this Court.
5. In view of this, office is directed to send this appeal to the District
Judge, Farrukhabad for deciding it on merits, after hearing both the
parties, in accordance with law.
(Sandeep Jain,J.)
February 23, 2026
Jitendra
Digitally signed by :-
JITENDRA KUMAR PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…