Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 31 (0.52 seconds)
South Asia Industries Private Ltd vs S. B. Sarup Singh And Others on 18 January, 1965 cites

Maung Ba Thaw vs Ma Pin on 15 January, 1934

The expression "final" prima facie connotes that an order passed on appeal under the Act is conclusive and no further appeal lies against it. The last sentence in S. 43 of the Act, in our view, does not restrict the scope of the said expression; indeed, the said sentence imposes a further bar. The expression "final" in the first part of s. 43 of the Act puts an end to a further appeal and the words "shall not be called in question in any original suit, application or execution proceeding" bar collateral proceedings. The section imposes a total bar. The correctness of the judgment in appeal cannot be questioned by way of appeal or by way of collateral proceedings. It is true that the expression "final" may have a restrictive meaning in other contexts, but in S. 43 of the Act such a restrictive meaning cannot be given, for Ch. VI of the Act provides for a hierarchy of tribunals for deciding disputes arising thereunder. The Act is a self contained one and the intention of the Legislature was to provide an exhaustive code for disposing of the appeals arising under the Act. The opening words of S. 43 of the Act "save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act emphasize the fact that the 767 finality of the order cannot be questioned by resorting to something outside the Act. Some of the decisions cited at the Bar defining the expression "final" may usefully be referred to. In Maung Ba Thaw v. Ma Pin() the Judicial Committee had to consider whether an appeal lay to the Privy Council against the order of the High Court under s. 75(2) of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920. The said Act provided by S. 4(2) that subject to the provisions of the Act and notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the decision of the District Court under the Act was final; but under S. 75 (2), however, there was a right of appeal to the High Court from the decision of the District Court. The judicial Committee held that in a case where the Act crave a right to appeal to the High Court, an appeal from the decision of the High Court lay to the Privy Council under, and subject to, the Code of Civil Procedure. It reiterated the principle that where a Court is appealed to as one of the ordinary Courts of the country, the ordinary rules of the Code of Civil Procedure applied. It will be notice at once that the order of the District Court was final subject to the provisions of the said Act and under the said Act a right of appeal was given to the High Court. The order of the High Court in the appeal was not made, final. Therefore, the Judicial Committee held that an appeal lay to the Privy Council against the order of the High Court. This decision, therefore, does not really help the appellant.
Bombay High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 31 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next