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

1996 Supreme(Ker) 233

J.B.KOSHY
Leela – Appellant
Versus
Pushpam – Respondent


Judgment :-

J.B. Koshy, J.

All these revision petitions are filed against interim orders passed in election petitions filed under S.87oftheKeralaPanchayatRaj Act, 1994. Short question to be considered in this order is whether a revision application will lie under S.115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against a non-appealable order passed by a Munsiffs Court in an election petition filed under S.87 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act.

2. It is contended that S.115 of the Code of Civil Procedure empowers that the High Court to call for the records of any case which has been decided by any court subordinate to such High Court. Since election petitions are decided by the Munsiffs Court which is subordinate to the High Court the revision application under S.115 C. P. C. will lie as against an interim order against which no appeal is provided. True scope of S.115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is explained by Supreme Court in Major S.S. Khanna v. Brig. F.J. Dillon (AIR 1964 SC 497), It was held that the word 'Case' used in S.115 will include not only suits but any proceeding in a civil court.

3. Chapter X of S.87 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to 'the act) provides t


































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