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

1969 Supreme(Ker) 128

Judges : HEGDE,RAY
LORD KRISHNA BANK.LTD. - Appellant
Versus
KARTHIAYANI AMMA - Respondent
Case No : C. A. No. 1775 (N) of 1966
Decided On : 08/11/1969
Advocates Appeared :
For

The over-ruling of previous decisions by a Full Bench of the Kerala High Court influenced the court's decision in allowing the appeal.

Headnote:

Special Leave - Decision of High Court - Reversal of Trial Court Decision - Remand for Disposal - Over-ruling of Previous Decisions

Fact of the Case:

The High Court reversed the decision of the trial court and remanded the case for disposal based on previous decisions, which were later over-ruled by a Full Bench of the Kerala High Court.

Finding of the Court:

The court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and restored the trial court's decision, following the Full Bench decision.

Issues: Correctness of High Court decision, Over-ruling of previous decisions

Ratio Decidendi: The Full Bench over-ruled previous decisions, and the court followed the Full Bench decision in allowing the appeal.

Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the High Court's order was set aside, and the trial court's decision was restored. The appellant was entitled to the costs of the appeal from the respondent.

Judgment :-

1. This appeal by Special Leave is directed against the decision of the High Court of Kerala in A. S. No. 462 of 1960, wherein the learned judges of the High Court reversed the decision of the trial court and remanded the case to the trial court for disposal in accordance with law mainly on the basis of the decision of that court in Chandy Cheriyan v. Travancore General Bank Ltd. 1965 KLT. 737. The correctness of the decision in Chandy Cheriyan's case as well as the decision in this case came up for consideration before a Full Bench of the Kerala High Court in Catholic Bank of India Ltd. (in liquidation) v. George Jacob, 1967 KLT. 416. The Full Bench held that both those cases were wrongly decided. It accordingly over-ruled the rule laid down in those decisions. The respondent is not represented before us. Neither he filed his statement of case nor was his counsel present before us now. The correctness of the Full Bench decision was not assailed before us. Under the circumstances and for the purpose of this case following that decision, we allow this appeal.

2. For the reasons mentioned above, we allow this Appeal, set aside the order of the High Court and restore that of the trial court. The appellant is entitled to the costs of this appeal from the respondent.

Allowed.

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 Back to top