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

1952 Supreme(All) 190

MALIK, SAPRU
BADRI PRASAD – Appellant
Versus
SHRI NATH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
GOPI NATH

MALIK, CJ.

( 1 ) THE Panchayati Adalat disposed of this case by an order passed before June 1950. There was a revision filed in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Phulpur, who on 3-6-1952, came to the conclusion that as only four Panches had decided the case and appended their signatures on the order, in place of five, the judgment of the Panchayati Adalat was invalid in view of Section 49, Panchayat Raj Act. Learned counsel has drawn our attention to Section 77a of the Amending act which lays down that it was not necessary for all the five Panches appointed to a Bench constituted under Section 49 of the Act to be present at all the sittings nor wag it necessary for all the five Panches to sign the judgment before it was delivered by the Panchayati Adalat. This amending section has been given retrospective effect, but it cannot reopen orders or decisions which had already been made. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate had disposed of the case on 3-6-1952, before the amendment and his order was perfectly in accordance with the law then in force.

( 2 ) LEARNED counsel has drawn our attention to Rule 62a of the rules framed under the Panchayat raj Act and has urged that that rule w




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