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

1956 Supreme(AP) 1

A.V.KRISHNA RAO, VISWANATHA SASTRY, BHIMASANKARAM, BHIMSHANKAR RAO
KESAVARAPU VENKATESWARLU – Appellant
Versus
SARDHARALA SATYANARAYANA – Respondent


( 1 ) THE Order of reference was delivered by the Hon ble Mr. Justice Bhimasankaram. This appeal does not exceed Rs. 1,500/- in value. It is objected by mr. B. V. Subrahmanyam, the learned Advocate for the appellant, that the appeal, not having been referred to a Bench by a single judge under Rule 1 of the Appellate Side Rules, cannot be heard by us. The question raised is one which is, in our opinion, of considerable importance. We may also note that several cases of this character have been disposed of by Division Benches. We,therefore, desire ro refer the following two questions to a Full Bench. 1. Is a Bench of two judges competent to hear a first appeal not exceeding rs. 7,500/--in value, when it is not referred to it by a single judge under rule 1 of the Appellate Side Rules ? 2. In any case, what is the effect of the hearing of such an appeal by a bench without objection having been taken by the parties to such hearing ? this appeal will, therefore, be posted before the Hon ble Chief Justice for directions as regards the constitution of a Full Bench. Opinion of the Full Bench. Viswanatha Sastry, J: the following questions have been referred to us : 1. Is a Beach of two judge





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