Skip to content


Chandharan Krishna Kumari Vs. Chaudhri Naubehar Singh - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Reported inAIR1931All242a
AppellantChandharan Krishna Kumari
RespondentChaudhri Naubehar Singh
Excerpt:
- - 1. this appeal is clearly misconceived and ought to be dismissed. an appeal is clearly a creature of statute. the order in question is one refusing to cancel the certificate, and not being an order granting, refusing or revoking a certificate no appeal clearly lies......bond but her application was dismissed on 13th july 1928. a second application to the same effect was made and this application also shared the same fate. an appeal has been presented to this court from the order of the learned additional district judge of moradabad refusing to cancel the certificate. a preliminary objection has been taken to the hearing of the appeal on the ground that no appeal lies. an appeal is clearly a creature of statute. under section 384, succession act (act 29 of 1925), an appeal lies to the court from an order of a district judge granting refusing or revoking a certificate under part 10 of the act. the order in question is one refusing to cancel the certificate, and not being an order granting, refusing or revoking a certificate no appeal clearly lies. we.....
Judgment:

Sen, J.

1. This appeal is clearly misconceived and ought to be dismissed. On 20th December 1920 a succession certificate was granted to the appellant conditional upon her furnishing security for Rs. 6,000. A security bond was duly executed. She made an application for the cancellation of the said bond but her application was dismissed on 13th July 1928. A second application to the same effect was made and this application also shared the same fate. An appeal has been presented to this Court from the order of the learned Additional District Judge of Moradabad refusing to cancel the certificate. A preliminary objection has been taken to the hearing of the appeal on the ground that no appeal lies. An appeal is clearly a creature of statute. Under Section 384, Succession Act (Act 29 of 1925), an appeal lies to the Court from an order of a District Judge granting refusing or revoking a certificate under Part 10 of the Act. The order in question is one refusing to cancel the certificate, and not being an order granting, refusing or revoking a certificate no appeal clearly lies. We accordingly dismiss this appeal with costs including in this Court fees on the higher scale.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //