The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Andhra High Court has jurisdiction over transferred proceedings from the Hyderabad High Court and the procedure for disposing of appeals does not affect the vested right of a party to appeal to the High Court.

SUBBA RAO, C.J. : -

This raises the question whether a Letters Patent Appeal would lie against the judgment of a single Judge of this High Court disposing of a Second Appeal arising out of the area, which was part of the erstwhile Hyderabad State but now included in the Andhra Pradesh State.

2. On 21-11-1956, Ansari J., allowed S. A. No. 84/1 of 1956 setting aside the decree of the appellate Court and restoring that of the trial Court. At the time the judgment was delivered, no request was made to the learned Judge for leave to prefer a Letters Patent Appeal. But, on 13-2-1957, the respondents in the appeal presented a Letters Patent Appeal to this Court and also an application for granting them leave to prefer the appeal. The office raised an objection as regards the maintainability of both the appeal and the petition for excusing the delay. As many Letters Patent Appeals have been filed under similar circumstances and some more are likely to be filed, this case has been posted for an authoritative ruling of this Court.

3. Clause 15 of the Letters Patent issued under Acts 24 and 25 Victoria governs the right of a party to prefer an appeal from the judgment of a single Judge of the Madras High Court in exercise of second appellate jurisdiction to the said High Court. The relevant part of the clause reads :

"and that notwithstanding anything herein before provided an appeal shall lie to the said High Court from a judgment of one Judge of the said High Court or one Judge of any Division Court, pursuant to S. 108 of the Government of India Act (made on or after the 1st day of February, 1929) in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction in respect of a decree or order made in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction by a Court subject to the superintendence of the said High Court, where the Judge who passed the judgment declares that the case is a fit one for appeal. Rule 95 of the Appellate Side Rules of the Madras High Court made by the said High Court in exercise of the powers conferred on it under the Letters Patent provides :

"When an appeal against an appellate decree or order has been heard and disposed of by a single Judge, any application for a certificate that the case is a fit one for further appeal to the High Court under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent of the High Court shall be made orally and immediately after the judgment has been delivered." The combined effect of Clause 15 of the Letters Patent and statutory R. 95 made by the Madras High Court is that a Letters Patent Appeal lies against the judgment of a single Judge of the Madras High Court disposing of a second appeal if he grants leave to prefer such an appeal on request orally and immediately made by an aggrieved party after the judgment has been delivered.

4. The State of Andhra came into existence on 1st October, 1953. Under S. 30 of the Andhra State Act, the High Court of Andhra shall have, in respect of the territories for the time being included in the State of Andhra, all such original, appellate and other jurisdiction as under law in force immediately before the prescribed day is exercisable in respect of the said territories or any part thereof by the High Court at Madras. Section 32, which provides for practice and procedure in the Andhra High Court, says :

"Subject to the provisions of this Part, the Law in force immediately before the prescribed day with respect to practice and procedure in the High Court at Madras shall with the necessary modifications, apply in relation to the High Court of Andhra, and accordingly that High Court shall have all such powers to make rules and orders with respect to practice and procedure as are immediately before the prescribed day exercisable by the High Court at Madras".

5.By virtue of the aforesaid two provisions, the High Court of Andhra was invested with the same jurisdiction exercised by the Madras High Court before the appointed day and was also ordained to follow the same practice and procedure obtainin