- (1.) I have heard Sri Arvind Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Istiyaq Ali, learned counsel for the respondent.
(2.) This appeal has been filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against the impugned judgment dated 2.7.2011 passed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The provision of appeal under the Hindu Marriage Act , 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') is laid down under Section 28 of the Act which reads as under:- "28. Appeals from decrees and orders.-(1) All decrees made by the court in any proceeding under this Act shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), be appealable as decrees of the court made in the exercise of its original civil jurisdiction, and every such appeal shall lie to the court to which appeals ordinarily lie from the decisions of the court given in the exercise of its original civil jurisdiction. (2) Orders made by the court in any proceeding under this Act under Section 25 or Section 26 shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), be appealable if they are not interim orders, and every such appeal shall lie to the court to which appeals ordinarily lie from the decisions of the court given in exercise of its original civil jurisdiction. (3) There shall be no appeal under this section on the subject of costs only. (4) Every appeal under this section shall be preferred within a period of [ninety] days from the date of the decree or order."
(3.) From a perusal of the provisions of Section 28 of the Act, it is clear that no appeal lies against an order passed under Section 24 of the Act. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant or by Sri Ishtiyaq Ali , learned counsel for the respondent that proceedings under Section 13 of the Act for divorce are still pending in the civil court. It is also admitted by both the parties that these are not proceedings under Section 19 of the Family Court Act.;