SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1970 Supreme(SC) 375

A. N. RAY, G. K. MITTER, M. HIDAYATULLAH
Prakash Chand Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
Hindustan Steel LTD. – Respondent


Advocates:
G.S.CHATTERJEE, R.K.AGRAWAL, SANTOSH CHATTERJI

Judgment

HIDAYATULLAH, C.J.I. : - The appellants before us who come by way of certificate from the High Court seek stay of a suit which has been restored to file by the High Court. At the very start we put to the counsel how certificate could have been granted in this case when the judgment and order of the High Court were not final. The counsel brought to our notice the case of Ramesh v. Gendalal Motilal Patni, AIR 1966 SC 1445 and says that his case is covered by this ruling. That was a case in which the only question to be considered was whether Article 133 of the Constitution was applicable in the two cases decided when the claim in the original suit or appeal to this Court was above Rs. 20,000/-. This particular question was not before the Court at all. Indeed, the Constitution contemplates the filing of an appeal by certificate only against a judgment, decree or final order of the High Court. It does not contemplate bringing an appeal in a suit which is still a live suit and in which further proceedings are to be taken. This has been the consistent view not only of this Court but also of the Privy Council. The leading case from the Privy Council is V. M. Abdul Rahman v .D. K.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top