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

1961 Supreme(AP) 204

SATYANARAYANA RAJU, KUMARAYYA
Mangu Venkatarah – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


KUMARAYYA, J.

( 1 ) THE Munsif-Magistrate, Jangaon, in purported exercise of his powers under section 19 of the Gram Panchayats Act, 1956 (Act XVII of 1956), passed an ex parte injunction order which he made absolute until further orders. But on the application of the aggrieved party he reviewed his order and set it aside as being beyond his competence. It is against this order that the petitioner has come up in Revision invoking the powers of this Court under section 115, Civil procedure Code.

( 2 ) THE Office has taken objection as to the maintainability of this petition on the ground that the Munsif-Magistrate in deciding the dispute under section 19 of the Hyderabad Gram Panchayats Act is not a Court subordinate to the High court within the meaning of section 115, Civil Procedure Code, and has placed the matter for decision before this Bench.

( 3 ) THE point for consideration is whether the reference to Munsif-Magistrate in section 19 of Act XVII of 1956 is made as a persona designata or as a Court. If the Munsif-Magistrate while exercising the powers under section 19 of the Act was intended to act as a designated person and not as a Court, it should necessarily follow that for





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