1892 (1) TMI 1 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether an appeal lies under Section 10 of the Letters Patent from the order made by a Judge of the High Court amending a decree.
2. The applicability of Section 206 of the Code of Civil Procedure to the appellate jurisdiction of the High Court.
3. The inherent jurisdiction of the High Court to amend its decrees.
4. The interpretation of Chapter XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure regarding appeals from orders.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Whether an appeal lies under Section 10 of the Letters Patent from the order made by a Judge of the High Court amending a decree:
The primary issue was whether an appeal could be made under Section 10 of the Letters Patent from the order of a Judge amending a decree. The judgment concluded that an appeal did not lie under Section 10 of the Letters Patent from the order made by the Judge. The court held that the order passed by the Judge was in the exercise of the appellate jurisdiction of the Court and was excluded by Chapter XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Chief Justice stated, "I think the order which was passed by our brother Tyrrell when he decided to amend the decree in the case, was an order from which an appeal is excluded by Chapter XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure."

2. The applicability of Section 206 of the Code of Civil Procedure to the appellate jurisdiction of the High Court:
The judgment discussed whether Section 206 of the Code of Civil Procedure applied to the High Court's appellate jurisdiction. It was noted that Section 206, coupled with Sections 582 and 632, was applicable to the High Court on its appellate side. The Chief Justice remarked, "I must regard s. 206 as applicable to a High Court on its appellate side as I regard those sections as practically extending to the appellate side of the Court the earlier provisions, so far as they are applicable to a High Court on its appellate side."

3. The inherent jurisdiction of the High Court to amend its decrees:
The judgment also addressed the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court to amend its decrees. It was stated that even if Section 206 did not apply, the High Court must have inherent jurisdiction to bring its decrees into accordance with its judgments. The Chief Justice noted, "If it does not apply, the Court which has to exercise appellate civil jurisdiction must have an inherent jurisdiction to bring its decrees into accordance with its judgments."

4. The interpretation of Chapter XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure regarding appeals from orders:
The judgment analyzed the effect of Chapter XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure on appeals from orders. It was concluded that Chapter XLIII limited the right of appeal to specific orders and excluded others. The Chief Justice explained, "Section 588 of the Code commences by enacting--'an appeal shall lie from the following orders under this Code and from no other such orders.' Section 591 provides that, 'except as provided in this chapter no appeal shall lie from any order passed by any Court in the exercise of its original or appellate jurisdiction.'"

Separate Judgments:

Douglas Straight, J.:
Douglas Straight, J. concurred with the Chief Justice, stating, "I am entirely of the same opinion as the learned Chief Justice, and I have nothing to add."

Syed Mahmood, J.:
Syed Mahmood, J. delivered a separate judgment, agreeing with the conclusion but emphasizing the importance of the principles involved. He stated, "I agree in the conclusion arrived at and the answer given by the learned Chief Justice and my brother Straight to the question referred to the Full Bench."

Knox, J.:
Knox, J. also delivered a separate judgment, expressing some doubts about the applicability of Section 206 to the appellate jurisdiction but ultimately agreeing with the Chief Justice. He stated, "I concur with the learned Chief Justice that the order passed by my brother Tyrrell when he decided to amend the decree, was an order from which an appeal was excluded by Chapter XLIII of the Code."

Conclusion:
The High Court concluded that an appeal did not lie under Section 10 of the Letters Patent from the order made by the Judge amending the decree. The Court emphasized the applicability of Section 206 of the Code of Civil Procedure to the appellate jurisdiction and the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court to amend its decrees. The interpretation of Chapter XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure was crucial in determining the exclusion of appeals from certain orders.