9911796707
TMI Blog1952 (3) TMI 47X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Singh, Rani Krishna Kuar entered into possession of the estate as his heir, that there was a litigation between Rani Krishna Kuar and a brother of Raja Ram Chandra Singh and that after several contests a family settlement is said to have been arrived at by which it was agreed that Rani Krishna Kuar should adopt Lal Durga Saran Singh, that she should continue in possession of the estate till her death and that the rights of Durga Saran Singh be deferred till after the death of the Rani. 3. The applicant, Rani Pateh Kuar, was married to Lal Durga Saran Singh and became a widow soon after, Lal Durga Saran Singh having died issueless. The applicant claimed that she was entitled to the Rampur Raj because she was the widow of Lal Durga Saran Singh, the adopted son of Raja Ram Chandra Singh and Rani Krishna Kuar, and had a vested interest in the estate due to the family settlement. She also pleaded custom in support of her claim. Her suit was for a declaration that she was the owner of all the movable and immovable properties which appertained to Rampur estate and at the time of the suit were under the management of the Court of Wards. The suit was contested by Raja Durbijai Singh who ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... points raised are divisible then no appeal lies with regard to those points upon which there has been an affirmation of the decree of the Court below. Reliance was placed on behalf of the opposite party upon a number of cases of several High Courts, viz., Karunalaya Valangupalli Pandian v. Rev. Father Pignot A. I. R. 1943 Mad. 67; Prandhan Das v. Promode Chandra Deb A. I. R. 1946 Pat. 19; Abdul Majid Khan v. Dattoo Raoji A. I. R. 1946 Nag. 307; Brahma Nand v. Sanatan Dharam Sabha, I. L. R. (1945) Lah. 156 (F. B.) and Wahid-ud-Din v. Makhan Lal, I. l. R. (1945) Lah. 242 (F.B.). Reliance was also placed upon a Bench case of our own Court reported in Wiqar Ali v. Narain Das, 1939 ALL. L. J. 62. In this case, however, the Full Bench case of Nathu Lal v. Baghubir Singh MANU/UP/0183/1931 : AIR1932All65 was not considered yet a view not in favour of the Full Bench cases of this Court was adopted. 8. In view of this difference of judicial opinion we consider that it is desirable that an authoritative pronouncement on this point be obtained. We accordingly direct that this case be laid before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice for the constitution of a Bench which may be larger than thre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich contained a declaration to the effect that the plaintiff was entitled to maintenance allowance, Raja Durbijai Singh preferred an appeal to this Court and against the rest of the decree the applicant filed a cross-objection. 15. A bench of this Court disposed of the First Appeal and the cross-objection by one judgment affirming the finding of the trial Court with regard to the title to the estate, but disallowing the declaration with regard to the maintenance allowance of ₹ 3000 a year with the result that the defendant's appeal was allowed, the suit was dismissed in its entirety and the cross-objection was dismissed. 16. The applicant made the present application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. The grounds for the proposed appeal as disclosed in the application make no mention of maintenance allowance. Before the referring bench it was contended on behalf of the opposite party that the appeal was confined to the question of title and as the decision of the Court below had been affirmed by this Court so far as that question was concerned, no appeal could be filed unless a substantial question of law was shown to be involved in the appeal. On behalf of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e proposed appeal is confined to the question of title or not as in either event the applicant will be entitled to appeal as of right. In the alternative it is urged that what one has to see is the entire subject-matter of the proposed appeal. If in respect of that subject-matter or any part thereof, the High Court has varied the decision of the trial Court there is no affirmance, and in such an event an appeal would lie to the Supreme Court as of right. This argument is based upon the assumption that either the original application is considered as being directed against the entire subject-matter of the decree of the High Court including the question of maintenance allowance or the amendment application is allowed. 20. On behalf of the opposite party it is urged that whether you take the proposed appeal as including the question relating to the maintenance allowance or not there can be no appeal as of right so far as the question of title is concerned, because in that respect the High Court has affirmed the decision of the Court below. It is pointed out that when the decision of the Court below has been affirmed by this Court on a question of fact, the point cannot be reagitate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssion is used. It may be observed that the enquiry about valuation is in respect of the subject-matter of the proposed appeal. The valuation of the subject-matter no longer in dispute in the proposed appeal is not to be taken into account. Again, the enquiry about substantial question of law is also in respect of the subject-matter of the proposed appeal and not in respect of the subject-matter not included in the proposed appeal. There is no reason why the affirmance or variance of the decision of the Court below should have to be seen in respect of the subject-matter with which the proposed appeal is not concerned. In this view of the matter the first contention of the applicant that irrespective of the subject-matter of the proposed appeal if the judgment, decree or final order of the High Court as a whole varies even a part of the decision of the Court below, an appeal will lie to the Supreme Court as of right even though the appeal is confined to a portion in respect of which the decision of the Court below was affirmed by the High Court, is not tenable. On the other hand, the entire subject-matter of the proposed appeal should be taken as one unit and as a one whole and ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which the question of affirmance and variance can arise. 24. Both parties relied upon a Privy Council decision in Annapurnabai v. Ruprao, 51 Ind. App. 319 (P. C.), and urged that their respective points of view were supported by the decision of the Privy Council in that case. Most of the decisions of the Indian Courts turned upon the interpretation of the observations of their Lordships of the Privy Council. It is not very difficult to divine what their Lordships really meant. So far as I can see, the decision supports the alternative contention of the applicant and does not support the contention of the opposite party. The facts of the case were these : There was a suit for possession of half the property of one Shankar Rao Patel deceased upon the allegation that the plaintiff had been adopted to him by his senior widow. The defendants were the junior widow and a person who was alleged to have been adopted by the junior widow. They denied the plaintiff's adoption and the junior widow claimed a sum of ₹ 3,000, per annum out of the estate as maintenance. The trial Court held that the plaintiff's adoption was proved and that the alleged adoption of defendant 2, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate, 8 cal. W. N. 294, and (2) That their Lordships accepted the entire contention of the petitioners as to the effect of Section 110, Civil P. C. as correct. In other words, they accepted the contention that if regard be had to the entire appeal--title plus maintenance allowance even then there was variance. 26. If their Lordships wanted to repel the appellants' contention on the last point they would have clearly said so and would not have said that the contention of the petitioners was correct. The fact that their Lordships limited the appeal to the question as to the maintenance allowance is quite different. That they did because the petitioners themselves stated that in view of the concurrent findings of the Court below they would no longer challenge that finding. Moreover, the petition for special leave to appeal is an entirely discretionary matter and even without the statement of counsel their Lordships could have limited the appeal to the maintenance allowance alone. But the fact remains all the same that their Lordships accepted both the contentions of the petitioners as correct. If their Lordships were of opinion that the decree of the High Court should be c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not agree however with the observation that in the case before the Privy Council the Board imposed restriction as to the appeal because they considered that it should be imposed. Whether the Privy Council imposed the restriction because it should be imposed or whether they imposed it because counsel for the applicant had intimated that he proposed to restrict the appeal to the question of maintenance is not at all clear from the terms of the judgment of the Board. 30. In Sri Narain Khanna v. Secy. of State, 1939 ALL. l. j. 736, it had been held that no appeal lay in respect of a matter on which there were concurrent findings by both the Courts even though in the proposed appeal was included a matter upon which there was variance. The Full Bench observed with regard to this decision : We find it impossible to reconcile this decision with the decision of the Privy Council in Annapurnabai v. Ruprao, 51 Ind. App. 319 (P.C.). On the principle of the Privy Council decision, in our judgments, an appeal did lie to the Privy Council. The decision of this Court, therefore, in 1939 All. L. J. 736 can no longer be considered to be good law. Then their Lordships considered anothe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inguished as referring to a case in which the subject-matter of the appeal to the Privy Council included the matter about which there was variance, and not to a case in which the matter on which there was variance was not the subject matter of the proposed appeal. 32. In Narendra Lal Das v. Gopendra Lal Das, 31 cal. W. N. 572, the decree of the trial Court gave the applicant a certain share in the property in suit but the appellate decree, while it affirmed the original decree in every other respect, modified it in respect of the share giving him the whole share he claimed so that on that point he had no further grievance. The question was whether the appellate decree was nevertheless one varying the original decree and the applicant was entitled to leave to appeal without proving that a substantial question of law was involved. Sir George Rankin observed as follows : We may take it, I think, that where the amount is a question in dispute, the fact that the Courts differ and that the higher Court differs in favour of the applicant does not mean that the decision is one of affirmance, but I am not in a case of this kind prepared to say that because on a totally different poi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the plaintiff in respect of the lands in two villages with regard to which the High Court had affirmed the decree of the lower Court. After a review of the various authorities, Harries C. J. expressed the opinion : ..... in my judgment the true test is whether the decision of the Court below as a whole has been affirmed by the High Court and not whether the decision on the point or points left in dispute have been affirmed by the High Court. The difficulty arises owing to the use of the phrase the decision of the Court immediately below the Court passing such decree. Had the words decree of the Court below been used, the matter would have been clear. In my view, however, the expression 'the decision of the Court immediately below the Court passing such decree' as used in Section 110 means the same as the expression decree of the Court below. Once an appeal has been decided, the decree of the Court below is merged in that of the appellate Court and strictly there is no longer in existence a decree of the trial Court. There is only a decision, and in my view the word 'decision' means the decision of the trial Court taken as a whole. It must be remembere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Kumvar v. Lal Bahadur MANU/UP/0057/1945 : AIR1946All262 . In that case a party had laid claim to 37 items of property. Her claim was dismissed by the Special Judge. In appeal this Court accepted her claim with regard to eighteen items of the property and affirmed the decree of the Special Judge with regard to the remaining items. The party proposed to go in appeal to His Majesty in Council against the decision of this Court regarding the items on which the decree of the Special Judge was affirmed by this Court. The application was allowed, even though there was no substantial question of law involved. Reliance was placed by Sinha J. who delivered the judgment of the Bench, mainly upon two decisions one reported in Jaggo Bai v. Harihar Prasad Singh, 1940 ALL. 869 (F. B.) and the other a Full Bench decision of the Patna High Court in Brajasunder Deb v. Rajendra Narayan MANU/BH/0019/1941. The view taken by the Bench is not supported by the view of the Full Bench in Jaggo Bai's case. With all respect it may be pointed out that the learned judge overlooked the fact that in Jaggo Bai's case this Court had varied the decision of the trial Court in respect of interest and the que ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal and a cross-objection there is only one judgment delivered and only one decree is prepared by the Court which embodies the adjudication in both the appeal and the cross-objection. On the other hand, under Order 41, Rule 35 the decree of the appellate Court has to contain the number of the appeal, the names and description of the appellant and the respondent and a clear specification of the relief granted or other adjudication made. If there are two cross appeals pending in the High Court two decrees have to be prepared giving all these particulars.'' Then his Lordship concluded: It therefore seems to me that from the mere fact that a cross appeal has been allowed and the adjudication so far as the matter in controversy in that appeal is concerned, it does not follow that the decision in the other appeal which is dismissed is not one of affirmance. Niamatullah, J. observed: In my opinion the decision of the suit, so far as it is the subject-matter of the proposed appeal to the Privy Council, is meant by the word 'decision' in Section 110, and not the decision of the whole suit. Then his Lordship made certain observations upon which th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the decree of the trial Court, there is no right of appeal unless there is a substantial question of law involved. (d) the fact that against the decision of the trial Court there were an appeal and a cross-objection in the High Court is immaterial as only one decree is prepared by the High Court both for the appeal and the cross-objection and the principles mentioned in (a), (b) and (c) will apply to the composite decree. (e) But if there were two appeals in the High Court from one decree of the lower Court, then the decree of the High Court in each of the appeals will be separately considered and if the proposed appeal to the Supreme Court arising out of one of such decrees relates to a matter on which that decree has affirmed the decision of the Court below, there will be no right of appeal without a substantial question of law being involved. Applying these principles to the present case, it is clear that if the proposed appeal relates merely to the question of title to the property and does not relate to the question of maintenance allowance, there is no right of appeal, even though the valuation of the subject-matter is not less than ₹ 20,000/-, because there is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... died issueless in May 1939. After her death Rani Fateh Kuar instituted a suit to obtain a declaration that she was entitled to succeed to the Estate as the heir of her husband, Durga Saran Singh, under the custom and also because he (Durga Saran Singh) had been adopted by Rani Krishna Kuar to her husband and in consequence of the adoption the Estate became vested in him and by virtue of a family settlement his right to possession of the Estate had been postponed until after the death of Rani Krishna Kuar. 48. The suit was contested by Raja Durbijai Singh, who claimed to be the next reversioner of the Raja and as such entitled to succeed to the Estate. He denied the alleged custom and the family settlement and the right of Rani Krishna Kuar to make any adoption. 49. The trial Court found that Durga Saran Singh had been validly adopted to her husband by Eani Krishna Kuar, and that the alleged custom or the family settlement was not proved. On this finding, the suit was dismissed but it was declared that Eani Fateh Kuar was entitled to receive a maintenance allowance of ₹ 3,000 per annum from Raja Durbijai Singh, who was declared to be the owner of the Estate. The decree o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 242 (F.B.). In view of the divergence of opinion on the point involved this reference was made to the Full Bench. 52. Our attention has been invited to later decisions of the Madras High Court in Gangadara Ayyar v. Subramania Sastrigal, I. l. R. (1947) Mad. 6 (F.B.) and in Viraraghava Rao v. Narasimhrao MANU/TN/0061/1950 : AIR1950Mad124 and earlier Special Bench decision of the Patna High Court in Brajasunder Deb v. Rajendra Narayan MANU/BH/0019/1941 (S. B.) and a later decision of the Lahore High Court in Attar Kuar v. Gopal Das, A. I. R. 1948 Lah. 1. 53. The decision of the matter in controversy depends upon the correct interpretation to be placed upon the clause quoted above, namely, where the judgment, decree or final order appealed from affirms the decision of the Court immediately below . On behalf of the applicant it has been contended that in order to find out whether the judgment, decree or final order appealed from affirms the decision of the Court below, we have to see whether the judgment, decree or final order of the High Court as a whole affirms the judgment, decree or final order of the Court below as a whole and that if there is variation even as to part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant. Judgment is the statement given by the Judge of the grounds of a decree or order and decree or order contains a formal expression of any adjudication which, so far as regards the Court expressing it, conclusively determines the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit: (vide, definitions of these terms in Section 2, Civil P. C.). The appeal against the judgment will, therefore, be directed against the grounds of the decree or order, and the appeal against the decree or order will be directed against the formal expression of the adjudication which conclusively determines the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit. The appeal against the judgment and decree or order may be directed against the grounds upon which the formal expression of the adjudication is based, and in the appeal the determination of the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy may be challenged. The extent to which the formal expression of the adjudication is or can be challenged in the appeal will determine the scope of the appeal, but it will have no bearing on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ference to the subject-matter in dispute in appeal to the Privy Council. The basis of that case is that if the two Courts are at one upon the matter which is to be in debate before the Privy councils then it is a case of a decree which affirms the decision of the Court immediately below. 57. The right of appeal against a judgment decree or final order under Section 110, Civil P. C. was, and even now under Article 133 of the Constitution of India is, only subject to one of the following three conditions, as stated in Article 133 of the Constitution: (a) that the amount or value of the subject-matter of the dispute in the Court of first instance and still in dispute on appeal was and is not less than ₹ 20,000 or such other sum as may be specified in that behalf by Parliament by a law; or (b) that the judgment, decree or final order involves directly or indirectly some claim or question respecting property of the like amount or value; or (c) that the case is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court. 58. Where the judgment, decree or final order appealed from affirms the decision of the Court immediately below, in any case other than a case referred to in Sub-cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interpreted Annapurnabai's case as not going further than this that where there is dispute as to the amount of the decree or as to the amount of damages the reasoning of Sree Nath Soy's case was not a correct application of that principle. I, however, see no justification for interpreting the decision of their Lordships of the Privy Council in that manner. 61. As observed by Raghava Rao J. in Vira-raghava Rao v. Narasimhrao MANU/TN/0061/1950 : AIR1950Mad124 : The collocation of the words the subject-matter in dispute on appeal to His Majesty in Council of Clause (1) of Section 110, Civil P. C., and of the words in Clause (3) the decree or final order appealed from is not such as to necessitate the reading together of the two sets of words so as to curtail a right of appeal which, on the only mode of construction justified by the plain positions in the section occupied by the two sets of words or at any rate on an equally possible manner of construction of which they are susceptible, is available to the litigant. This mode of reading together of the two sets of words is that lay at the root of the doctrine of Sree Nath Boy's case, 8 Cal, W. N. 294, which admitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... term decree, which has been referred to more than once in this judgment. It is true that in a suit there are several matters in controversy relating to and concerning the rights of the parties. These matters are adjudicated upon and there is one formal expression of that adjudication, which is incorporated in the decree of the Court. Such a contention was raised and repelled by the Full Bench in Abdur Samad v. Mt. Aisha Bibi MANU/OU/0012/1947 (F.B.). 65. Let us take a few illustrations: (1) in a suit where the plaintiff claimed to be entitled as an adopted son to property valued at more that ₹ 10,000 one of the defendants, the widow of the alleged adoptive father, denied the adoption and claimed to be entitled to ₹ 3,000 per annum by way of maintenance. The trial Court held that the plaintiff had substantiated the plea of adoption and gave the widow maintenance at the rate of ₹ 800 per annum and it was declared a charge upon the estate. The defendant appealed to the High Court and the decree of the trial Court in so far as it concerned the adoption was confirmed but the rate of maintenance was varied instead of ₹ 800 per annum the widow was awarded mai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of dispute in the appeal to the Privy Council was all the items of property in respect whereof claim had been allowed. Gangadara Ayyar v. Subramania Sastrigal I. L. R. (1947) Mad. 6 (F. B.). 66. In my opinion, therefore, it is not necessary to construe the expression judgment, decree or final order appealed from in conjunction with or as relating to the subject-matter of dispute in the proposed appeal or to hold that the expression means the subject-matter of the judgment, decree or final order appealed from . The expression should be interpreted independently and with reference to its context and given its plain meaning. 67. The expression the decision of the Court immediately below in any case must similarly be interpreted to mean the whole decision of the suit by the Court. The significance of the words in any case cannot be lost sight of; consequently, it is the decision in the case, and not the decision of any matter in controversy, that has to be taken into consideration. 68. In Tassaduq Rasul Khan v. Kashi Ram, 25 ALL. 109 (P. C.), the word decision , used in the corresponding Section 596, Civil P. C., 1882, was thus interpreted by their Lordships of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the first Court had been affirmed except in respect of a small change in favour of the applicants and that no question of law was involved. Then an application for special leave was presented to their Lordships of the Privy Council. While arguing the application for special leave, Sir George Lowndes, counsel for the petitioner, contended that, under Sections 109 and 110, Civil P. C., they had a right of appeal to the Privy Council. Since the appellate Court did not affirm the decision of the trial Court but varied it, it was not material under Section 110 whether any substantial question of law was involved. The contention of the petitioner's counsel as to the effect of Section 110, Civil P. C. was held by their Lordships of the Privy Council to be correct and it was held that the petitioners had a right of appeal. The leave to appeal was, no doubt, limited to the question of maintenance, but that was in view of the statement made on behalf of the petitioners that having regard to the concurrent findings of the two Courts the petitioners desire to appeal only with regard to the amount of maintenance. 73. In Annapurnabai's case MANU/PR/0073/1924 the right of appeal to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the claim was in respect of 11 items of property. The trial Court gave a declaration to the plaintiff in respect of six out of eleven items of the property but dismissed the rest of the claim. On appeal to the High Court the claim of the plaintiff in respect of four out of the remaining five items of the property was allowed; and in the proposed appeal to the Privy Council by the defendant the validity of the plaintiff's claim with regard to ten out of elven items of the property was being challenged. The application for leave to appeal was opposed on the ground that, as there were concurrent findings so far as six of the properties are concerned, the petitioners can appeal only with regard to four items decreed by the High Court and that they in themselves do not fulfil the requirement with regard to value. The petitioner's reply was that the value of the four items was immaterial as the subject-matter of the proposed appeal was the ten items of property in respect of which the plaintiff had succeeded. After referring to the case of Annapurnabai MANU/PR/0073/1924 the Full Bench pointed out : There is here a pronouncement of the Judicial Committee that, where there is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n on the point or points left in dispute have been affirmed by the High Court. The difficulty arises owing to the use of the phrase the decision of the Court, immediately below the Court passing such decree'. Had the words 'decree of the Court below' been used, the matter would have been clear. In my view, however, the expression 'the decision of the Court immediately below the Court passing such decree' as used in Section 110 means the same as the expression 'decree of the Court below'. Once an appeal has been decided the decree of the Court below is merged in that of the appellate Court and strictly there is no longer in existence a decree of the trial Court. There is only a decision, and in my view, the word 'decision' means the decision of the trial Court taken as a whole. It must be remembered that an appeal is not preferred against any item or items in a decree. The appeal must be preferred against the whole decree, though for the purposes of valuation the subject matter in dispute in appeal only 'is valued'. 78. In Sm. Attar Kuar v. Gopal Das, A. L. R. 1948 Lah. I the Lahore High Court had expressed a similar view. Two earlier ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decision of the Court immediately below whether the variance is brought about at the instance of the appellant or at the instance of the respondent it cannot be said that the appellate decree affirms the decision of the first court. This section does not conceive of the decree as partly affirming and partly varying the original decision. The Legislature appears to have envisaged an appellate decree either as upholding that decision or as varying or modifying it and if an appeal is permissible, it is against the decree as a whole and not against the finding or adjudications on the controversies involved in the suit. 80. There is one more aspect of the matter which needs consideration. It may be argued that according to the interpretation which I have placed upon the expression where the judgment, decree or final order appealed from affirms the decision of the Court immediately below an appellant will be entitled to . a certificate even when he desires, to challenge in appeal only the concurrent findings of the two Courts. In considering this argument we will have to disabuse our minds of the idea that the appeal is allowed against particular findings recorded by either or bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecessary to do so. Their Lordships seem to have mentioned the limitation in their order in view of the statement made before them by the counsel for the petitioner. As the respondents were not represented, no request could have been made on their behalf to their Lordships to impose the limitation which they did. As their Lordships could have refused to hear the appellant on a point which was concluded by concurrent findings of the two Courts at the time of the hearing of the appeal, so it was hardly necessary for them to impose the limitation while granting special leave. 82. The Full Bench decisions of this Court in Nathu Lal v. Raghubir Singh, 54 ALL. 146 (S. B.) and Jaggo Bai v. Harihar Prasad Singh I. L. R. (1941) ALL. 180 (F. B.) lay down the correct law and these decisions fully support the applicant's right to appeal to the Supreme Court as of right, irrespective of the subject-matters which she may or may not be entitled to raise at the hearing of the appeal in the Supreme Court. By the Court 83.The application for amendment and the petition for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court are allowed. It is certified that the case fulfils the requirements of Article 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
