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

1957 Supreme(All) 6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
V. Bhargava, J.
SUNDAR DAS - Appellant
Versus
LACHMAN DAS - Respondents
Civil Revn. 70 Of 1954
Decided On : 01/04/1957

Advocates Appeared:
B.R.Avasthi, Ram Lal Anand

Headnote:

Revision - Displaced Persons Debts Adjustment Act 70 of 1951 - The court held that a Tribunal dealing with proceedings under the Displaced Persons Debts Adjustment Act 70 of 1951 is not a court subordinate to the High Court for the purposes of the Code of Civil Procedure, and therefore, no revision can be entertained in the High Court under Section 115 of the code.

Fact of the Case:

The revision arose from proceedings under the Displaced Persons Debts Adjustment Act 70 of 1951. The question arose as to whether the revision lies to the High Court under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that a Tribunal dealing with proceedings under the Displaced Persons Debts Adjustment Act 70 of 1951 is not a court subordinate to the High Court for the purposes of the Code of Civil Procedure, and therefore, no revision can be entertained in the High Court under Section 115 of the code. The revision was dismissed with no order as to costs, and the stay order was discharged.

Issues: The main issue was whether a revision lies to the High Court under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure for proceedings under the Displaced Persons Debts Adjustment Act 70 of 1951.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a Tribunal dealing with proceedings under the Displaced Persons Debts Adjustment Act 70 of 1951 is not a court subordinate to the High Court for the purposes of the Code of Civil Procedure, as it is neither a district court nor a civil court or a court of small causes.

Final Decision: The revision failed and was dismissed with no order as to costs, and the stay order was discharged.

V. BHARGAVA, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision arises out of proceedings under the Displaced Persons Debts Adjustment Act 70 of 1951. When this revision, cattle up for hearing, a question first arose as to whether such a revision did at all He to this Court under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The jurisdiction to deal with proceedings under that Act 70 of 1951 is vested in Tribunal and not in civil Courts. Under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the High Court can call for the record of any case which has been decided by any court subordinate to such a High Court. Section 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure lays down what courts are courts subordinate to the high Court for the purposes of the Code of Civil Procedure. That section is to the following effect:-"for the purposes of this Code, the District Court is subordinate to the High Court, and every civil Court of a grade inferior to that of a District Court and every Court of Small Causes is subordinate to the High Court and District Court. "

( 2 ) A Tribunal exercising powers under Act, 70 of 1951 is neither a district court nor a civil court or a court of small causes. Consequently, such a Tribunal is not a court subordinate to the High court for the purposes of the Code of Civil Procedure. The only courts which are subordinate to the High Court for the purposes of the Code of Civil Procedure are those enumerated in Section 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure and may be such, other courts as may have been made subordinate to the High Court for the purposes of the Code of Civil Procedure by any other enactment.

( 3 ) ACT 70 of 1951 does not specifically lay down that a Tribunal seized of proceedings under that act is to be a court subordinate to the High Court for the purposes of the Code of Civil procedure.

( 4 ) SECTION 25 of that Act merely lays down that the proceedings under that Act are to be regulated by the provisions contained in the Code of Civil Procedure but do not make the Code of Civil Procedure as a whole applicable to those proceedings. In these circumstances, it must be held that a Tribunal dealing with proceedings under the Displaced Persons Debts Adjustment act 70 of 1951 is not a court subordinate to the High Court for the purposes of the Code of Civil procedure and consequently no revision can be entertained in this Court under Section 115 of the code. The revision fails and is dismissed but I make no order as to costs. The stay order is discharged


.

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