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

1908 Supreme(All) 57

AIKMAN, KARAMAT HUSAIN
In Re: Kedar Nath – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Karamat Husain, J. - The learned District Judge of Meerut acting u/s 36 of the Legal Practitioners Act (XVIII of 1879), by his order dated the 15th June 1908, framed a list containing the names of 11 persons who by the evidence of general repute were proved to his satisfaction to habitually act as touts and directed it to be hung in his own Court and in all Courts subordinate to him including the Rent Courts. The applicant Kedar Nath is one of the persons whose name is on that list. He has applied for the revision of that order of the learned District Judge. There is no appeal from such an order nor is there any revision either u/s 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, or Section 622 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The only section under which the High Court has been held entitled to interfere with an order passed u/s 36 of the Legal Practitioners Act is Section 15 of the High Courts Act (24 and 25 Vict., C. 104, 6th August 1861). In the application for revision there is no ground to the effect that Section 15 of the High Courts Act gives the power of superintendence to the whole Court and not to a Bench of two Judges and that, therefore, this Bench has no jurisdiction to

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