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

2003 Supreme(Ker) 191

K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, K.PADMANABHAN NAIR
Messrs Rajalakshmi Associates – Appellant
Versus
Messrs Meenakshi Papers – Respondent


Judgment :-

Radhakrishnan, J.

These appeals have been preferred under Section 5 (2) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958 against the judgment of learned single Judge of this court. Maintainability of the appeals has been questioned in view of Section 100-A introduced by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act 2002 with effect from 1.7.2002. Section 100-A of the Code of Civil Procedure is extracted below for easy reference.

“100-A. No further appeal in certain cases. Notwithstanding anything contained in any Letters Patent for any High Court or in any instrument having the force of law or in any other law for the time being in force, where any appeal from an original or appellate decree or order is heard and decided by a Single Judge of a High Court, no further appeal shall lie from the judgment and decree of such Single Judge.

Contention was raised that in view of the provisions of Section 100-A of the C.P.C. (Amendment) Act, 2002 appeals filed after 1.7.2002 under Section 5 (2) of the Kerala High Court Act are not maintainable and only those appeals which were filed prior to 1.7.2002 would alone be maintainable. Scope of Section 100-A with regard to pending appeals preferred under












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