/. HIGH COURTOF JUDICATURECHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH : HON'BLE SHRI SsR. NAYAK, C.J. WRiT PETiTiON N0.1285 OF 2006 PETITIONER RESPONDENT versus Smt. Anu @ Anuradha Agrawal W/o Vinay Agrawal, aged about 28 years C/o Forth Mile Stone, Chayan para, Post Salugada, Police Station Bhaktinagar, District Jalpaigudi West Bengal Through - Power of Attomey Suresh Kumar Bansai, S/o Late Santlal Bansal, aged about 50 years, R/o Kotra Road, Raigarh, District Raigarh C.G. Vinay Agrawai S/o Sagar Agrawal, aged about 29 years, R/o Gandhiganj Raigarh, Poiice Station Raigarh, District Raigarh C.G. Present : r.Rajesh Pandey, learned counsei for the petitioner. \. ORALORDER (Passed on 20th March, 200S) A short question ftat arises for decision-making in this writ petation is whether an application flled by the petitioner under Order 9 Rule 13 of CPC before the Civil Court which had passed the decree for seeking setting aside of the ex parte decree should be heard and decided by the Civil Court itself or such an application is liabie to be transferred to the Family Court on Constitution of the Family Court in terms of Section 8 of the Famity Courts Act 1984 (for short 'the Act'). This question need not detained the Court for long. The provisions of the Act in that regard are quite specific and do not involve interpretation. Section 8 of the Act reads as follows: 2. \ "8. Exclusion of jurisdiction and pending proceedings.- Where a Famiiy Court has been established for any area,- (a) no district court or any subordinate civil court refsrred to in sub-section (1) of section 7 shall, in retation to such area, have or exercise anyjurisdiction in respect of any suit or proceeding of the nature referred to in the Explanation to that sub-section. (b) no magistrate shall, in reiation to such area, have or exereise any jurisdiction or powers under Chapter IX oftheCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974); (c) every suit or proceeding of the nature referred to in the Explanaffon to sub-section (1) of section 7 and every proceeding under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974),- (i) which is pending immediately before the establishment of such Family Court before any district court or subordinate court referred to in that sub-section or, as the case may be, before any magisfrate underfte said Code; and (ii) which would have been required to be instituted or taken before or by such Famiiy Court if, before the date on which such suit or proceeding was instituted or taken, this Act had come into foree and such Family Court had been established, shal! stand transferred to such Family Court on the date on which it is estabiished.'" (2) No doubt, when the Famity Court was estabiished, the application filed by the petitioner under Order 9, Rute 13 of CPC was pending before the civil Courtwhich had passed ex parte decree against the petitioner granting decree of divoree and when that proceeding was pending, the famiiy Court was established. Clause (a) of Section 8 divests 3 the jurisdiction of the civi! Gourt in relation to the exercise of any jurisdiction in respect of any suit or proceeding of the nature referred to in the explanation tosub-Section (1) ofSection 7. Clause (c) of Section 8 mandates that every suit or proceeding pending on the fiie of the civi! Court immediately before the establishmsnt of Family Court shall stand transferred to the Family Court on the date on which it is established. In other words, every suit or proceeding which were pending on the date of the establishment ofthe Family Court shall stand transferred to the Family Court statutorily without the intervention of the actions of the parties. (3) In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Sd/- ChiefJustice •fc-^&'