1. This is a memorandum of appeal presented by the respondent in First Appeal No. 134 of 1949 against the judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court dated 11-12-1957. By that judgment the learned Single Judge allowed the appeal preferred by the appellants and sent back the case to the court below for grant of letters of administration to the appellants on the usual terms. The argument of learned Counsel is that under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Patna High Court his client has got a right in law to file an appeal against the judgment of a learned Single Judge and that no leave of the learned Single Judge is necessary for the filing of the appeal. The opposite view-point was presented on behalf of me respondents by Mr. Raghunath Jha, who submitted that there is no right of appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent from the judgment of a learned Single Judge in this case; and in view of the fact that the learned Single has refused leave to the appellant it is not competent for the appellant to file a Letters Patent appeal.

2. The question at issue turns upon the proper construction of Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Patna High Court, which is in the