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

1950 Supreme(Mad) 176

RAJAMANNAR, BALAKRISHNA AYYAR
In reV. S. Shanmuga Mudaliar – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
N.R. Raghavachariar - for Petitioner.

Judgement

Rajamannar, C.J. :- In this application the petitioner seeks both for a writ of certiorari and for a writ of mandamus. The certiorari is sought to quash the order of the Board of Revenue refusing to interfere on behalf of the petitioner with the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Cheyyar levying stamp duty and penalty on a document which the officer held to be a partition deed. The only ground on which this writ is sought is that the Board did not give an opportunity to the petitioner to be orally heard. There is nothing in the Act or in the Rules framed thereunder which enjoins on the Board the duty to give an oral hearing to a person who invokes their revisional jurisdiction. All that quasi judicial Tribunals like the Board of Revenue have to do is to give sufficient opportunity to the persons who approach them for the exercise of their jurisdiction to state their case. Local Government Board v. Alridge, (1915) A. C. 120 : (84 L. J. K. B. 72). This opportunity has been given to the petitioner, because presumably he has stated all his grounds of objection to the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer in his revision petition. He is not entitled as of right to be he



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