2000 Supreme(Raj) 559
High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : N.N.MATHUR,A.K.SINGH
MOHAN LAL - Appellant
Versus
LAL CHAND - Respondent
S. A. 19 Of 1998
Decided On : 08/02/2000
The main legal point established in the judgment is that special appeals under S. 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 are maintainable against judgments originating in subordinate civil courts or tribunals, and the distinction between writ petitions under Article 226 and Article 227 depends on the averments made in the pleadings.
Headnote:
Special Appeal - Jurisdiction of Rajasthan High Court - Rajasthan High Court Ordinance 1949 - S. 18 - S. 96 CPC - S. 173 Motor Vehicles Act
Fact of the Case:
The case involved questions regarding the maintainability of special appeals under S. 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949, the applicability of the life of an ordinance under the Government of India Act 1935, and the distinction between writ petitions filed under Article 226 and Article 227 of the Constitution.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that special appeals are maintainable even against judgments originating in subordinate civil courts or tribunals, and that the life of the ordinance after six months has no relevance. It also clarified that a special appeal is not maintainable against a writ petition filed purely under Article 227 of the Constitution.
Issues: The issues revolved around the jurisdiction of the Rajasthan High Court, the applicability of the life of an ordinance, and the distinction between writ petitions filed under Article 226 and Article 227 of the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that special appeals are analogous to Letters Patent appeals, are maintainable against judgments originating in subordinate civil courts or tribunals, and that the distinction between writ petitions under Article 226 and Article 227 depends on the averments made in the pleadings.
Final Decision: The court directed the special appeals to be laid before the appropriate bench for hearing and disposal on merit.
MATHUR, J.
( 1 ) THE Division Bench of this Court (Coram Honble Mr. Justice R. R. Yadav and Honble Mr. Justice A. S. Godara, as his Lordship then was) considered the following prima facie substantial and intricate questions as of general importance in these appeals:"1. Whether provision for special Appeals can be said to substitute of letters patent after enforcement of the Constitution?2.>Whether special Appeal is maintainable only against those matters which originally originate in the High Court with an avowed object to check and balance?3. Whether provision relating to life of an ordinance enshrined under Government of India Act 1935 and thereafter under the Constitution are applicable to the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance 1949. If so, its effect in filing Special Appeals after expiry of six months from the date of issuance of Rajasthan High Court Ordinance 1949?4. Whether Special Appeals can be filed under S. 18 of Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 even in those proceedings and suits which originate in subordinate Civil Courts or tribunals against which writ petition is filed under Articles 227 of the Constitution?5. Whether Special Appeals under S. 18 of Rajasthan High Court Ordinance 1949 are maintainable against first Appeals decided by learned Single Judge of this Court under S. 96 CPC and Misc. appeals decided by Single Bench under S. 173 of Motor Vehicles Act?6. Whether there is distinction between a writ petition filed under Article 226 and a writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution arising out from subordinate Courts or tribunals and both can be treated to have originated before High Court in its original jurisdiction?"
( 2 ) A general notice was given to the learned members of the Bar to assist the Court in deciding the aforesaid question, if they so wish.
( 3 ) WE have heard Mr. L. R. Mehta, Mr. M. Mridul, Senior Advocate, Mr. D. S. Shishodia, Senior Advocate and Mr. Vineet Kothari.
( 4 ) THE above questions of law with respect to the special appeal under S. 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 and that of Letters Patent appeal, have arisen in the context that though all the High Courts in India after the commencement of Indian Constitution on 26th November, 1949, owes their existence under Articles 214 and 225, of the Constitution of India, still their power of Letters Patent Appeal or Special Appeal flow from paramount Charter under which they came into existence.
( 5 ) THE phrase "letters Patent" denotes an open letter under governmental seal granting some right or privileges. Letters Patent Act. 1865 was enacted for establishing High Court of Judicature in India. By the said Act, the High Courts were established in Calcutta, Madras and Bombay. Thus, they are known as Charter High Courts. Clause 15 provided intra Court appeal named as Letters Patent appeal. The said Letters Patent appeal has continued in the Charter High Courts even after the adoption of the Indian Constitution. On formation of the State of Rajasthan in the year 1949, by process of integration of different princely States, the Rajasthan High Court came to be established under the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949. Clause 18 of the Ordinance also provides an intra Court appeal. known as special appeal. Thus, in order to better appreciate the controversy involved, it would be convenient to acquaint with the brief history of the establishment of the Rajasthan High Court.
( 6 ) FACTS PERTAINING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT : The State of Rajasthan, as it is today, is the result of integration and amalgamation achieved in different stages. There were number of dynastic princely States each under a ruler. The India became free on 15th August, 1947. The Indian Independence Act. 1947 was enforced in place of the Government of India Act, 1935 and in consequence thereof, Independence from British Rule and India became a sovereign country. Most of the rulers of the princely States voluntarily