( 2026:JHHC:19398 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI F.A. No. 166 of 2016 Somlal Manjhi son of late Babujan Manjhi, resident of village-Jaspur, P.O. Nirsa, P.S. Nirsa, District-Dhanbad at present resident of Rajpura, Colliery P.O. and P.S. Nirsa, District-Dhanbad ...... … Appellant Versus 1. Mahadeo Sao 2. Shiblal Sao 3. Shankar Sao, all sons of late Hari Prasad Sao, residents of village Magurdih, P.S. Nirsa, P.O. Barbendia District-Dhanbad 4. The State of Jharkhand 5. Executive Engineer, Maithan Right Bank, Power Station, DVC, P.O. Maithan, P.S. Chirkunda, District-Dhanbad 6. District Land Acquisition Officer, Dhanbad, P.O., P.S, and District-Dhanbad .…. … Respondents -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Appellant :Mr. Ramchander Sahu, For the Resp. Nos. 1 to 3 : Mr. Naresh Pd. Thakur, Advocate 02/ 02.07.2026: In view of the amendment in Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts (Jharkhand Amendment) Act, 2018 (Jharkhand Act 09 of 2019), the pecuniary appellate jurisdiction of the District Judge has been enhanced to Rs. 25 Lakhs. The said amendment was notified in the Extraordinary Gazette on 11th June, 2019 published on 12th June, 2019. By virtue of the said amendment on amongst the other under section 21(1) Clause (a) the word “2 lakhs 50 thousand” has been substituted by “25 lakhs”. Somewhat similar situation arose in the year 2002. Section 21 of the said Act was amended in the year 2002 and the pecuniary appellate jurisdiction of the District Courts were enhanced to Rs. 2.50 lakhs. After considering the submissions of the parties, by a detailed judgment dated 03.10.2002 passed in F.A. No. 173 of 1990, this Court held that the intention of the legislature in amending the provisions of the Act was for quick disposal of the appeals. Paragraph 13 of the said judgment is quoted herein below:- “13. The intention of the Legislature in amending the provisions of the Act appears to be mainly for quick disposal of appeals pending in ( 2026:JHHC:19398 ) the High Court for the last few decades. Because of acute paucity of time in the High Court, as this Court spends most of its time in deciding criminal appeals and constitutional matters under Article 226 of the Constitution and other relates constitutional provisions, the Legislature in its wisdom thought it proper to increase the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Judges and to empower the High Court to transfer pending appeals arising out of a suit in which the valuation is less than rupees two lacks fifty thousand, so that all such appeals could be disposed of as early as possible.” 2. Further the Court held that since there is no saving clause, the appeals filed prior to the amendment also needs to be transferred. This Court has taken into consideration the proviso to Section 21, which was also incorporated in the year 2002 and came to a conclusion that the cases should be transferred. 3. In view of the proviso added to Section 21 which gives powers to the High Courts to transfer the appeals which were filed before the amendment of Section 21, this Court comes to a conclusion that the amendment has retrospective effect. 4. In view of the above facts and circumstances, exactly in the similar matter to that of the order passed in F.A. No. 173 of 1990, this Court is inclined to transfer this case to the office of the Principal District Judge, Dhanbad which has territorial jurisdiction to hear the appeal or to transfer the same to the other District Judge. 5. Accordingly, let the file of this appeal be transferred to the Principal District Judge, Dhanbad. Principal District Judge, Dhanbad shall issue notice to all the parties before hearing the appeal. 6. Pending I.A, if any, stands disposed of. Dt.02.07.2026 ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-