S. 100-A of the Civil Procedure Code bars further appeals, including Letters Patent Appeals, from the judgment of a single Judge of the High Court in a civil miscellaneous appeal from an order of remand passed by the lower appellate court while exercising appellate jurisdiction.

A. R. LAKSHAMANAN, J.

( 1 ) THE point that arises for determination is whether in view of S. 100-A of the Civil P. C. , a Letters Patent Appeal lies from the judgment of a single Judge of the High Court in a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal from an order of remand made by the lower appellate Court while disposing of an appeal. FACTS:

( 2 ) THE respondents filed the suit O. S. No. 122/66 before the District Munsif, Giddalur for partition of a bus with all its accessories into sixteen shares and for allotment of three such shares to them or to apply the provisions of the Partnership Act and for an account of all realisations made by the 1st defendant. Various issues were framed but the trial of the suit was confined to the issue as regards the maintainability of the suit. The trial court dismissed the suit holding that the suit is not maintainable as the alleged partnership was opposed to public policy and offends the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and S. 23 of the Contract Act.

( 3 ) AGGRIEVED by that decision, the respondents took up the matter in appeal - A. S. No. 29 of 1972 before the learned District Judge, Ongole and the appellate authority reversed the finding of the trial court on the issue pertaining to the maintainability of the suit, allowed the appeal and remanded the case with a direction to the trial court to proceed with the trial of the suit and the other issues.

( 4 ) THE defendants preferred before the High Court a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (C. M. A. No. 373 of 1976) as against that order of remand under O. 43, R. 1 of the C. P. C. read with S. 104 C. P. C. and a single Judge of the High Court heard and allowed that appeal through a judgment dated Feb. 17, 1977 pronounced in the open court.

( 5 ) NO application was made before the single Judge as required under R. 105 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court Appellate Side Rules for leave to appeal under Cl. 15 of the Letters Patent of the High Court orally and immediately after the judgment had been delivered on Feb. 17, 1977.

( 6 ) SRI Ramamohana Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondents requested for grant of leave to appeal under Cl. 15 of the Letters Patent four or five days after the date of the delivery of judgment. That was opposed by Sri Rajasekhara Reddi learned counsel appearing for the appellants on the ground that no further appeal lies as per S. 100-A of the C. P. C. from the judgment of the single Judge in the appeal from an order of remand passed in appeal by the Court below and, therefore, no leave under Cl. 15 of the Letters Patent can be granted as a right of appeal was itself abolished by S. 100-A of the C. P. C. Alternatively it was contended that this is not a fit case for the grant of leave under C. . 15. In any event, the learned counsel contended that no application for leave was made as required under rule 105 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court Appellate Side Rules for leave to appeal orally and immediately and, therefore, the request of the learned counsel for the respondents cannot be acceded to.

( 7 ) BUT the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the bar of S. 100-A C. P. C. operates only in respect of second appeals under S. 100 C. P. C. or civil miscellaneous second appeals but not in respect of appeals under S. 104 read with O. 43 of the C. P. C. from an order of remand.

( 8 ) AS the solution to the problem raised depends upon the interpretation of S. 100-A C. P. C. we shall read the same: "s. 100-A. No further appeal in certain cases:- Notwithstanding anything contained in any letters patent for any High Court or in any other instrument having the force of law or in any other law for the time being in force where any appeal from the appellate decree or order is heard or decided by a single Judge of a High Court, no further appeal shall lie from the judgment, decision or order of such single Judge in such appeal or from any decree passed in such appeal. "

( 9 ) IT is admitted, at any rate not disputed, that S. 100-A pr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document