Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (1.38 seconds)Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Gujarat Educational Institutions Services Tribunal Act, 2006
Section 115 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 11 in Gujarat Educational Institutions Services Tribunal Act, 2006 [Entire Act]
Article 16 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
National Insurance Co. Ltd., ... vs Nicolletta Rohtagi And Ors on 17 September, 2002
6. The right of appeal is a statutory right and where the law provides
remedy by filing an appeal on limited grounds, the grounds of challenge
cannot be enlarged by filing a petition under Article 226/227 of the
Constitution on the premise that the insurer has limited grounds available
for challenging the award given by the Tribunal. Section 149(2) of the Act
limits the insurer to file an appeal on those enumerated grounds and the
appeal being a product of the statute it is not open to an insurer to take
any plea other than those provided under Section 149(2) of the Act (see
National Insurance Co. Ltd, Chandigarh vs. Nicolletta Rohtagi and others
2002(7) SCC 456). This being the legal position, the petition filed under
Article 227 of the Constitution by the insurer was wholly misconceived.
Where a statutory right to file an appeal has been provided for, it is not
open to High Court to entertain a petition under Article 227 of the
Constitution. Even if where a remedy by way of an appeal has not been
provided for against the order and judgment of a District Judge, the
remedy available to the aggrieved person is to file a revision before the
High Court under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Where
remedy for filing a revision before the High Court under Section 115 of
CPC has been expressly barred by a State enactment, only in such case a
petition under Article 227 of the Constitution would lie and not under
Article 226 of the Constitution. As a matter of an illustration, where a
trial Court in a civil suit refused to grant temporary injunction and an
appeal against refusal to grant injunction has been rejected, and a State
enactment has barred the remedy of filing revision under Section 115
C.P.C., in such a situation a writ petition under Article 227 would lie and
not under Article 226 of the Constitution. Thus, where the State
legislature has barred a remedy of filing a revision petition before the
High Court under Section 115 C.P.C., no petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution would lie for the reason that a mere wrong decision without
anything more is not enough to attract jurisdiction of High Court under
Article 226 of the Constitution.
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Sadhana Lodh vs National Insurance Company Ltd. & Anr on 24 January, 2003
In the case of Sadhana Lodh vs. National Insurance Co.Ltd. and
another reported in (2003) 3 SCC 524, the Apex Court held that the
right to appeal is a statutory right where the law provides remedy by
way of filing an appeal on limited grounds and such challenge cannot
be enlarged by filing a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India. It would be profitable to reproduce the findings
and observations of the Apex Court as under:
Adesh Pal vs University Grant Commission & 2 on 23 March, 2015
5. I am not inclined to go into the merits of the order of suspension
since I am of the view that the appeal is maintainable. A coordinate
bench of this Court had an occasion to deal with the very same issue,
with which I am confronted in the case of 'Adesh Pal Vs. University
Grant Commission And Ors.' in Special Civil Application No.4715 of
2015; decided on 05.05.2015.