IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
(AT SUVA)
Civil Jurisdiction

CIVIL ACTION NO.178 OF 1993

BETWEEN:

SURESH CHANDRA
(f/n Ram Samujh)
Applicant

- and -

ROSHNI DEVI
(f/n Kampta Prasad)
Respondent

Dr. M.S.D. Sahu Khan for the Applicant
V. Nathan (Public Legal Advisor) for the Respondent

DECISION

This is an Application for leave to appeal against my decision in this matter delivered today.

Dr. Sahu Khan argues that important points of law relating to the jurisdiction of the Courts and the workings of the Matrimonial Causes Act are involved and should be ruled upon by the Fiji Court of Appeal. He also says if leave is refused and the matter proceeds to hearing in this Court but the Judgment following that hearing is reversed on appeal then the hearing in this Court will have been wasted.

Mr. Nathan in answer emphasises that the matter should not be dragged out any further at this stage and that the Fiji Court of Appeal should have all the facts before it before hearing any appeal. This it would not do on an interlocutory appeal.

As I stated in my earlier decision there is undoubtedly legal force in Dr. Sahu Khan's submissions but I have no doubt that this is the proper Court for these proceedings to be heard and determined. By granting leave I would be taken to encourage an appeal (Hubball v. Everitt & Sons Limited (1900) TLR 168). My view however is that an appeal should not be lodged at this stage and accordingly and in all the circumstances the Application is refused.

M.D. SCOTT
JUDGE

23 August, 1994
HBC0178.93S