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 clause 10 of the Letters Patent came up for consideration before a Full Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Laxminarayan v. Shivlal Gujar (2003 (1) Indian Law Decisions 64). Above question came up for decision before a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in S.Shiva Raja Reddy and others v. S.Raghu Raj Reddy and others (2002 (4) CCC 75 (AP) where in the impact of Section 100-A with respect to appeals preferred under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent 1865 was also examined. Full Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court as well as the Division Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court have taken the view, after elaborate consideration of the law on the point, that in view of Section 100-A of the C.P.C. (Amendment) Act 2002 appeals filed after 1.7.2002 are not maintainable and only such Letters Parent Appeals saved are those filed prior to 1.7.2002 whether they have been admitted or not. The decision rendered by the Full Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court as well as the division Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court have reduced our burden in examining the scope of Section 100-A viz-a-viz Section 5 (2) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958. After examining both the decisions at length and hearing the counsel on either side, we fully concur with the views expressed by those High Courts with regard to the scope and ambit of Section 100-A as amended by Act 22 of 2002.

2. We may point out that Full Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court as well as the Division Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court were dealing with appeals filed under Letters Patent. Our High Court is not a chartered court and was not a court in British India. Kerala High Court was established after the formation of the new State under the States Re-organization Act, 1956. Therefore, High Court of Kerala has no letters patent. Kerala High Court Act, 1958 regulates the business and the exercise of powers of the High Court of the State of Kerala. High Court of Kerala has in exercise of the powers conferred by Article 225 of the Constitution of India, Section 122 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and all other powers enabling in this behalf, has also published rules of the High Court of Kerala 1971. The Kerala High Court Act and the Rules framed there under regulate the business and exercise of powers there under. The Kerala High Court Act, 1958 has been enacted by the State Legislature in exercise of the powers conferred under Entry III List II read with Article 225 of the Constitution of India. Administration of justice has been transferred from Entry 3 of List II to Concurrent List 11-A of List III of VII Schedule. Constitutional validity of the Kerala High Act came up for consideration before this court in 1960 KLT 109. Same question again came up before a Full Bench of this court in K