Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 44

15. The points for consideration are

(i) does the existing position under Article 133 require to be changed; and

(ii) if so, is it sufficient to enhance the valuation limit from the present 20,000 rupees to one lakh rupees, as proposed in the lapsed Bill (Annexure A); or

(iii) is it preferable to repeal sub-clauses (a) and (b) of Article 133(1) allowing appeals under that Article only on a certificate of fitness under sub-clause (c) [without prejudicing in any way the power of the Supreme Court to grant special leave under Article 136]; or

(iv) alternatively, in place of sub-clauses (a) and (b), should there be a provision for appeal from a judgment, decree or final order of a Division Bench of the High Court1 exercising original jurisdiction (ordinary or extraordinary, e.g., on a writ petition) irrespective of value, or when above a certain value;

(v) whichever alternative is adopted, what should be the transitional provision as regards-

(a) matters pending in the High Court by way of appeal or revision or in its original jurisdiction, and

(b) matters pending in the High Court for the issue of a certificate on the basis of pecuniary valuation; would a provision on the lines of clause 4 of the lapsed Bill2 be satisfactory:-

1. Or of a Judicial Commissioner's Court with a single Judge

Appellant Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in Civil matters Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys