9911796707
TMI Blog1948 (7) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remand order without in any way objecting to it. The plaintiff filed this civil miscellaneous appeal against the order of remand on 4th September,1946, i.e., nearly two months after the final disposal of the suit. He has also filed an appeal before the District Judge against the ultimate dismissal of his suit. 2. Without going into the merits I think that a preliminary objection taken to the maintainability of this appeal must be upheld. It is conceded that it was filed in this Court in time, there being a long delay in the grant of a copy. The appellant however subsequent to the remand order did nothing whatsoever to signify to the learned District Judge his intention of appealing against the remand order or to apply to him for stay of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant signified his intention of appealing against the order of remand by applying for stay and had stay been refuseda most unlikely contingency. He did nothing of the kind and submitted himself to the scope of the remand order without making any protest. 3. No direct Madras decision on this point has been placed before me. There are however a number of decisions of the Calcutta High Court which have clearly held that such an appeal is not maintainable if the appellant raised no objection at or before the re-hearing of the suit. This has become well-established law in the Calcutta High Court in a number of decisions: Madhu Sudan Sen v. Kamini Kanta Sen (1905) I.L.R. 32 Cal. 1023, Baikuntha Nath Dey v. Nawab Salimulla Bahadur (1907 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the lower appellate Court. In the present case there is only this difference, viz., that the appellant has filed an appeal against the judgment after remand in the District Court and has also simultaneously filed this civil miscellaneous appeal against the order of remand itself. 4. It appears to me that there are some fundamental differences between a preliminary decree in execution and a final decree worked out on its basis which formed the basis of fact in Lakshmi v. Mani Devi (1911) 21 M.L.J. 1063 : I.L.R. 37 Mad. 29. Their Lordships in that decision proceed on the assumption that remand orders and subsequent judgments on their basis were analogous to preliminary decrees and final decrees. I think I would be justified in regarding t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... favour on the basis of the remand order must seek his relief in the lower appellate Court. 5. I should like to deal with the final argument that the appellant cannot be deprived of his statutory right of appeal against the remand order to this Court. Successive Indian Legislatures have sought to safeguard the rights of litigants by very generous provision for appeals and second appeals, not by any means complimentary to trial Judges. The cycles of appeals the law permits in India have no parallel in the juristic history of any other country so far as I am aware. It is necessary that these wide privileges of appeal should be exercised within the confines of reason and practicality. 6. The appeal is in the result dismissed with costs an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
