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

1941 Supreme(Mad) 251

SOMAYYA


ORDER

Somayya, J.

1. It is argued that this application for review can be heard only by a Bench as it relates to a decree in a first appeal. The point is directly covered by the decisions of the Calcutta High Court in Aubhoy Churn Mohunt v. Shamont Lochun Mohunt I.L.R.(1889) Cal. 788 and Maksud Mahi v. Secretary of State (1911) 9 I.C. 532. Both cases related to second appeals which were heard by two Judges as they used to be even in this Court till a few years ago. In the former case the Judges say this at pages 792 and 793:

As I said just now, at the time this rule was returned Mr. Justice Wilson had gone away on furlough and another gentleman had been appointed to perform his duties, and, consequently, he had ceased to have any jurisdiction as a Judge of this Court for the time. He was not at the time attached to the Court, and, consequently, Mr. Justice Beverley was the only one of the Judges who heard the appeal who remained attached to the Court, and was, in my opinion, the only Judge who could be appointed to hear this application. So that in our opinion Mr. Justice Beverley was quite right in deciding that he had jurisdiction to hear the matter, and was in fact the only person




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