ORDER D.S. Mathur, J. - This is an appeal by B.K. Baron against the order dated 7-9-1961 of the District Judge of Saharanpur dismissing his petition for stoppage of alimony directed to be paid to Mrs. Baron, on the ground that the District Judge had no jurisdiction to entertain such a petition. 2. Mrs. Baron had applied for judicial separation and consequential relief. That petition was dismissed by the then District Judge. The High Court in appeal granted judicial separation and also alimony vide Mrs. Annie Baron Vs. B.K. Baron, AIR 1950 All 516 . 3. The question for consideration is whether the alimony could be stopped by the District Judge or it can be so stopped or reduced by the High Court. 4. Section 37 of the Indian Divorce Act was amended under the Indian Divorce (UP Amendment) Act, 1957 in its application to this State and the amended Section 37 gives power to the court, i.e. to the High Court or the District Judge, as the case may be, to order payment of alimony. Under the proviso to this section the court can discharge or modify the order or temporarily suspend the same as to the whole or any part of the money so ordered to be paid. The use of the word "the" shall suggest that the court which can discharge or modify the order shall be the court which had passed that order. In the instant case, the order for payment of alimony was passed by the High Court and this order could be modified by the High Court and not by the District Judge. 5. Mrs. Annie Baron Vs. B.K. Baron, AIR 1950 All 516 does not show that the District Judge had been authorised to entertain an application for enhancement, reduction or stoppage of the permanent alimony. The District Judge could, if moved, consider only two matters, i.e. the amount to which Mrs. Baron was entitled for the expenses of her residence and also the amount payable for the education and maintenance of the daughter, Joys Baron. The District Judge thus rightly held that he had no jurisdiction to entertain the present petition. 6. The F.A.F.O. has no force and it is hereby dismissed. Costs easy as no one has put in appearance from the side of the Respondent.