Which one of the following statements regarding judiciary in India is not correct ?

The statement regarding the Munsiff’s court is incorrect. In the Indian subordinate judiciary, there is a clear functional separation at the lowest level. The Court of Munsiff (or Civil Judge Junior Division) handles civil cases of limited pecuniary value [c1, c2, t2]. Conversely, criminal cases at this level are tried by the Court of Judicial Magistrate [c1, c2]. While the District and Sessions Judge possesses both civil and criminal jurisdiction [c4, t2], the Munsiff's court is strictly a civil court [t2, t9]. Regarding other options, the District Judge is indeed the principal court of civil jurisdiction [t9], and while they can impose capital punishment, such a sentence must be confirmed by the High Court [t1, t2]. The hierarchy places the Munsiff at the bottom of the civil ladder, distinct from the criminal magistrates [c1, t1].

Sources

1. [1] Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 35: Subordinate Courts > STRUCTURE AND JURISDICTION > p. 364
2. [2] Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity. 7th ed., McGraw Hill. > Chapter 35: Subordinate Courts > STRUCTURE AND JURISDICTION > p. 364
3. [3] Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 21: ORGANISATION OF THE JUDICIARY IN GENERAL > No Federal Distribution of Judicial Powers. > p. 336
4. [4] https://www.mcrhrdi.gov.in/splfc/week3/L%20-%20Structure%20of%20Courts%20-%20Dr.R.Madhavi.pdf