9911796707
TMI Blog1919 (7) TMI 3X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The lower appellate Court remanded each of the appeals for retrial and appeals purporting to be under Order 43 Rule 1(u) have been preferred to this Court. It was held in A. A. O. No. 243 of 1918 that where the order of remand was made not on a preliminary point, no appeal lies against it. Mr. A. Krishnaswami Aiyar conceded that if an order can be predicated as not falling within Order 41 Rule 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iti Justitia which were not specifically conferred by the rules. This is the view taken by a strong Bench of the Calcutta High Court consisting of five Judges Ghuznavi v. The Allahabad Bank Ltd. I.L.R. (1917) Cal. 929. The same view was taken in Jambullayya v. Rajamma I.L.R. (1912) Mad. 492 and Kuppalan v. Kunjavalli (1913) 9 M.L.T. 373. We see no reason for not following these decisions. It is tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... some years, courts in this Presidency have been informed by the High Court that they have an inherent power of remand. Vide Ramchandra Joshi v. Hazi Kasim I.L.R. (1892) Mad 207, Kuppalan v. Kunjavalli (1911) 9 M.L.T. 373 and Jambulayya v. Rajamma I.L.R. (1892) Mad. 492 : 24 M.L.J. 412 . There is no reason for imputing to the lower courts ignorance of these decisions and for suggesting that the pow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ility of which was decided by the appellate Court in a particular manner. It cannot be said that this point is collateral to the merits of the case. 6. In the next appeal No. 272 of 1919, there is much to be said in favour of Mr. K.V. Krishnaswami Aiyars argument that the remand was wholly unnecessary. If we were hearing the appeal, we would not have applied the procedure adopted by the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
