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

1968 Supreme(Del) 23

I.D.DUA, T.V.R.TATACHARI
AYA SINGH – Appellant
Versus
MUNSHI RAM – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.C.Mohindra, Prakash Narain

I. D. Dua, CJ, T. V. R. Fatachari

( 1 ) AYA Singh, defendant in the trial Court, presented an appeal in this Court from an order of the learned Additional District Judge dated 18th September, 1967 allowing the appeal of Manshi Ram plaintitff and after setting aside the Judgment and decree of the trial Court, remanding the case back to the Court of First instance for re-decision. By mistake an appeal was p"esented in this Court as a regular second appeal from a decree on which court fee of Rs. 686. 80 Paise was affixed. The office note shows that an enquiry was made from the counsel for the appellant as to how a regular second appeal lay against an order of remand. To this, the counsel replied that the appeal may be treated as an appeal from older and may accordingly be registered as first appeal from order. The office, without realising that it was, as a matter of fact, a second appeal, for it was the second appellate Jurisdiction of Ibis Court which was being invoked, registered the appeal as an F. A. 0. instead of an S A. O. The appeal was on this basis marked before a Division Bench for preliminary taring. The learned counsel for the appellant, when re-presenting the appeal with





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