Back
DIPANKAR DATTA, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Abhishek Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Dinesh Kumar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. revocation of appellant's license granted on breach. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. appeal against single judge's order by appellant. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. interpretation of rule 5 in context of appeals. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. right to be heard supersedes rule 5 limitations. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 5. non-joinder of necessary parties impacts appeal validity. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. restoration of appeal pending results of prior orders. (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Permission, to file special leave petitions, is granted.
2. Delay condoned.
3. Leave granted.
4. Appellant was allotted, by grant of a license, a fair price shop in place of the respondent no.1, upon revocation of the license of such respondent on the ground of breach of lawful terms and conditions thereof.
5. Revocation of the license and an appellate order of its affirmance were the subject matter of challenge in a writ petition1[Writ C No. 37063 of 2019] presented by the respondent no.1 before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. In such writ petition, the appellant was not impleaded as a party.
6. The writ petition of the respondent no.1 came to be allowed by an order dated 10th June, 2025 of a Single Judge. The order revokin
The right to a hearing and fair process prevails over procedural bars, ensuring justice is not obstructed by strict adherence to rules about party joinder.
A procedural order calling for pleadings from parties does not constitute a judgment under Chapter VIII R.5 and is not appealable.
The main legal point established is that the appeal must meet the criteria set out in Rule 5 of Chapter VIII of the Rules of Court 1952 to be deemed maintainable.
Judicial orders made without proper jurisdiction are void, emphasizing the Chief Justice's authority in roster determination.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Contempt Court must be conscious that it is not possessed of the powers of other corrective jurisdictions like review or appeal against th....
Point of Law : Order passed on an application for interim relief is ordinarily not a "judgment" but it will qualify to be called ''judgment' if it affects valuable right of the party or decides an im....
Special appeals against tribunal decisions are barred under Section 100-A CPC, confirming that such tribunals lack the status of a court for appeal purposes.
An intra-court appeal is not maintainable against orders of a learned Single Judge under Section 24-C of the Orissa Education Act, 1969, as per the Full Bench ruling prohibiting such appeals post-ame....
(1) Letters Patent Appeal – Word ‘judgment’ has a concept of finality in a broader and not in a narrower sense--Where an order vitally affects a valuable right of defendants, it will be treated as a ....
Interlocutory orders are not appealable if they do not conclude pending proceedings.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
