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

1920 Supreme(All) 343

PIGGOTT, WALSH
Ratan Lal – Appellant
Versus
Muhammad Hamidullah Khan – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. This is an application in revision against an order by which a Court of first appeal, setting aside the decree of the Trial Court dismissing the suit, substituted for that decree an order under Order XXIII, Rule 1, of the Code of Civil Procedure, permitting the plaintiff to withdraw from the suit with liberty to institute a fresh suit in respect of the subject matter of the same. The jurisdiction of an Appellate Court to pass such an order has not been challenged, at any rate since the decision of a Bench of this Court in the case of Afzal Begam v. Akbari Khannm 28 Ind. Cas. 857 : 13 A.L.J. 444 : 37 A. 326. It is contended that the lower Appellate Court, in the present instance, acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally and with material irregularity, because it has not, given any reasons for granting the plaintiff permission to withdraw, such as to satisfy the requirements of Order XXIII, Rule 1, Clause (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The case has been referred to a Bench of two Judges, because of a presumed conflict of authority as to the limits of the revisional jurisdiction of this Court in such a matter. If we confine our attention to cases decided by

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