Skip to content


Lala Kirat Chund Singh Vs. the Maharaja of Jeypore - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in52Ind.Cas.694
AppellantLala Kirat Chund Singh
RespondentThe Maharaja of Jeypore
Excerpt:
vizagapatnam agency rules, rules 17, 19, 20 - appellate judgment of assistant agent--high court, power of, to direct review under rule 20 remedy of aggrieved party. - - we observe that in case an appeal is presented to the agent, he will be well advised to consider the propriety of excluding the time taken in the present proceedings in dealing with the limitation applicable......mr. b.n. sarma objects that the petition cannot be heard because it is presented as authorised by agency rule '20. but that rule deals only with petitions for an order directing the agent to review his own judgments: and we do not see how we can treat the judgment of an assistant agent as passed by the agent for this purpose. the appeal in which that judgment was passed was transferred to the assistant agent under agency rule 19, and the only course open under the rules for any party dissatisfied with an appellate judgment passed in these circumstances appears to be under rule 17 to appeal to the agent, not to move this court, as petitioner prefers to do. we are, therefore, constrained to dismiss the petition with costs. we observe that in case an appeal is presented to the agent, he.....
Judgment:

1. Mr. B.N. Sarma objects that the petition cannot be heard because it is presented as authorised by Agency Rule '20. But that rule deals only with petitions for an order directing the Agent to review his own judgments: and we do not see how we can treat the judgment of an Assistant Agent as passed by the Agent for this purpose. The appeal in which that judgment was passed was transferred to the Assistant Agent under Agency Rule 19, and the only course open under the rules for any party dissatisfied with an appellate judgment passed in these circumstances appears to be under Rule 17 to appeal to the Agent, not to move this Court, as petitioner prefers to do. We are, therefore, constrained to dismiss the petition with costs. We observe that in case an appeal is presented to the Agent, he will be well advised to consider the propriety of excluding the time taken in the present proceedings in dealing with the limitation applicable.


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