9911796707
TMI Blog1951 (7) TMI 19X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the basis of the suit The trial Court accepted the defence and dismissed the suit, and the same judgment was upheld on appeal. The second appeal came up for hearing before a Single Judge of this Court, who referred the question Whether acknowledgment of a previous debt not barred by limitation could be the basis of a suit? to a Division Bench. In the meanwhile, the same question came up for decision in 'Kanraj v. Vijey Singh' 1950 R L W 234 before another Division Bench, and it was held that : An acknowledgment of liability only allowed extension of limitation if made before expiration of the period of limitation but did not create a new right. It did not operate as a new contract but only kept alive the original cause o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court was a Court of co-ordinate jurisdiction, and as such the Full Bench decisions of the Indore High Court stood on the same footing as the Full Bench decisions of the High Court of the United State, and were binding on Division Benches and Single Judges until reconsidered by a larger Bench of the High, Court of the United State, It was also pointed out that under the constitution of the High Court of the United State, it was laid down that the High Court shall apply the laws and usages prevailing in any State forming part of the United State to civil, criminal and other proceedings in that State till such time as the duly constituted authority modifies them , and the term 'law' was sufficiently wide to include Judge-made l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r was converted Into a High Court and made a Court of Record by the Government of Jodhpur Act, 1947. As to whether the High Court of the Covenanting State of Jodhpur established in 1947 was or was not a Court of co-ordinate jurisdiction does not arise in this case. So far as the judgments of the former Chief Court of Jodhpur are concerned, they were not by a Court of co-ordinate, jurisdiction, and the Full Bench decision of the Chief Court of Jodhpur is of no binding authority on this High Court. 6. The second ground of decision in the Madhya Bharat case (AIR 1950 MB 31) rested on the particular language used in the Ordinance constituting the High Court, and certain other Ordinances. In Rajasthan, the saving clause as regards the laws in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion such law shall be the law which would have been applied by the Chief Court of Lower Burma to such cases if these Letters Patent had not issued. The majority of the Judges held that the word law did not include the published decisions of the Chief Court of Lower Burma unless they had been merged in any enactment or used to modify or repeal any enactment. The provision with respect to the law to be administered by the High Court is to be found in section 34 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, and it is to the effect that the law or equity and the rule of good conscience to be applied by the High Court to each case coming before it in the exercise of its jurisdiction as a Court of Appeal, Revision or Reference, will be the law or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
