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

1985 Supreme(Ker) 98

SREEDHARAN
MUHAMMEDKUTTY – Appellant
Versus
KUNJAMMA – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. Appellant in A.S. No. 47/ 76 on the file of Subordinate Judge's Court, Mavelikara is the petitioner in this Civil Revision Petition. On account of non-payment of the deficit court fee on the Memorandum of Appeal, the appeal was dismissed on 17-10-1980. On 24-10-1980 appellant filed I. A. No. 1557/80 praying for restoration of appeal to file. The said application was purported to be one filed under S.151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The learned Subordinate Judge dismissed that application by his order dated 3-1-1981 holding that such a restoration application will not lie. The correctness of that order is in challenge.

2. S.107(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure reads as follows:

"(2) Subject as aforesaid, the appellate Court shall have the same powers (and shall perform as nearly as may be the same duties as are conferred and imposed by this code on Courts of original jurisdiction in respect of suits instituted therein."

This provision gives no room to doubt the jurisdiction of the Appellate Court. The jurisdiction of the Original Court has to be exercised by the Court of Appeal as nearly as may be applicable in a given situation. Order VII R.11 of the Code 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