9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Jurisdiction and authority of a third judge nominated under Rule 11 of Chapter I of the High Court Rules and Clause 26 of the Letters Patent. 2. Procedure to be followed after the third judge delivers his opinion. 3. Validity and implications of the third judge's decision on the entire case. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Jurisdiction and Authority of a Third Judge The primary question was whether a third judge, nominated due to a difference of opinion between two judges of a Division Bench, can decide the entire case or only the specific point of difference. The judgment clarifies that under Rule 11 of Chapter I of the High Court Rules and Clause 26 of the Letters Patent, the third judge's jurisdiction is confined to expressing an opinion on the specific point of difference. The third judge does not have the authority to decide the entire case or any other points not referred to him. This is evident from the statement: "The third Judge has no jurisdiction to decide any other point. His jurisdiction is limited to the point on which the Judges of the Division Bench are divided in opinion." Issue 2: Procedure After the Third Judge Delivers His Opinion The judgment elaborates that after the third judge records his opinion, the case must be returned to the Division Bench for a final decision. The Division Bench, which may or may not be the same as the original one, will then decide the point according to the majority opinion, including the third judge's opinion. This is encapsulated in the statement: "After the receipt of the opinion of the third Judge, it is the Division Bench which 'decides' the point, although it cannot decide the point by applying its mind de novo on the merits but is bound to decide the point according to the majority opinion of the judges." Issue 3: Validity and Implications of the Third Judge's Decision on the Entire Case The judgment underscores that if the third judge goes beyond his jurisdiction and decides the entire case, that part of his opinion must be ignored as it is ultra vires. The relevant part of the judgment states: "If the third Judge expresses his opinion on any other point or finally decides the case as a whole, the latter part of his opinion (be it styled as 'order' or 'judgment') has to be ignored as without jurisdiction." Conclusion: 1. Jurisdiction of the Third Judge: The third judge can only express an opinion on the specific point of difference and not decide the entire case. 2. Procedure Post-Opinion: The case must be returned to a Division Bench for a final decision based on the majority opinion, which includes the third judge's opinion. 3. Validity of the Third Judge's Decision: Any decision by the third judge on points beyond the specific difference is ultra vires and must be ignored. The judgment concludes by affirming that the Chief Justice can constitute another Division Bench to decide the case if the original Bench is unavailable, ensuring the case is decided according to the method provided by Clause 26 of the Letters Patent.
|
