A Petition under Article 227 is not maintainable when a specific statutory remedy of appeal exists.

The petitioner (husband) filed a Civil Miscellaneous Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order passed by the Family Court.

The impugned order was passed under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (GW Act), concerning the custody or return of a ward.

The opposite party (wife) raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the petition, arguing that since a specific statutory remedy of appeal exists, the High Court should not exercise its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227.

Whether a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is maintainable against an order passed under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, given the availability of a statutory appeal.

Section 47 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, which explicitly provides that an appeal lies to the High Court from orders made under Section 7 or Section 25 of the Act.

The availability of a specific remedy under the CPC or statute deters the High Court from entertaining revisions under Article 227.

Article 227 jurisdiction must be exercised sparingly and not as a substitute for an appeal.

Orders touching upon vital rights/matters of moment are adjudicatory and appealable under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act.

The court examined whether the nature of the impugned order fell within the categories of appealable orders defined in the GW Act.

The court reasoned that since Section 47(c) of the GW Act "in no uncertain manner" defines orders under Section 25 as appealable to the High Court, the petitioner had an efficacious statutory remedy.

The court observed that supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 cannot be invoked "at the drop of a hat" when an alternative statutory mode of redressal is provided.

The court rejected the petitioner’s reliance on the Gujarat High Court’s view that such orders are merely interlocutory, preferring the interpretation that orders affecting vital rights under the GW Act are adjudicatory and thus subject to the appellate process.

Consequently, the petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable. The Civil Miscellaneous Petition was dismissed.