Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.22 seconds)Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 9 in Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 [Entire Act]
Jacky vs Tiny @ Antony & Ors on 9 April, 2014
The aforesaid judgement in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation has
been followed in several subsequent decisions by different division
benches referred to above.
Jogendrasinhji Vijaysinghji vs State Of Gujarat & 6 on 22 January, 2014
The Supreme Court in Jogendrasinghji Vijaysinghji, supra
held as under:-
Radhey Shyam & Anr vs Chhabi Nath & Ors on 26 February, 2015
"25. From the aforesaid pronouncements, it is graphically
clear that maintainability of a letters patent appeal would
depend upon the pleadings in the writ petition, the nature
and character of the order passed by the learned Single
Judge, the type of directions issued regard being had to
the jurisdictional perspectives in the constitutional
context. Barring the civil court, from which order as held
by the three-Judge Bench in Radhey Shyam (supra) that a
writ petition can lie only under Article 227 of the
Constitution, orders from tribunals cannot always be
regarded for all purposes to be under Article 227 of the
Constitution. Whether the learned Single Judge has
exercised the jurisdiction under Article 226 or under
Article 227 or both, needless to emphasise, would depend
upon various aspects that have been emphasised in the
aforestated authorities of this Court. There can be orders
passed by the learned Single Judge which can be
construed as an order under both the articles in a
composite manner, for they can co-exist, coincide and
imbricate. We reiterate it would depend upon the nature,
contour and character of the order and it will be the
obligation of the Division Bench hearing the letters patent
appeal to discern and decide whether the order has been
passed by the learned Single Judge in exercise of
(Downloaded on 29/08/2019 at 09:59:27 PM)
(9 of 14) [SAW-853/2019]
jurisdiction under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution or
both. The Division Bench would also be required to
scrutinize whether the facts of the case justify the
assertions made in the petition to invoke the jurisdiction
under both the articles and the relief prayed on that
foundation. Be it stated, one of the conclusions recorded
by the High Court in the impugned judgment pertains to
demand and payment of court fees. We do not intend to
comment on the same as that would depend upon the
rules framed by the High Court."
Lic vs Nandini J. Shah . on 20 February, 2018
In fact, the subsequent division benches have doubted the
correctness of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., supra on this
very premise by overruling the objection raised by the Registry of
this Court as to the maintainability of the appeal before the
division bench, observing that confusion is persisting as in many
cases, appeals are being filed and entertained and at the same
time, the appeals were entertained after the aforesaid order
passed by the division bench.
Ramesh Kumar Malpani vs Ummed Singh Sushila Ors on 3 May, 2013
Yet another division bench of this Court in Ramesh Kumar
Malpani vs. Ummed Singh Sushila Devi Memorial Trust, Jaipur-
2013 (3) DNJ (Raj.) 1133 in a landlord-tenant dispute has
entertained the appeal before the division bench.
Shalini Shyam Shetty & Anr vs Rajendra Shankar Patil on 23 July, 2010
(11 of 14) [SAW-853/2019]
The division bench of this Court in Hindustan Petroleum
Corporation Ltd., supra, which is based on the judgement of
Supreme Court in Shalini Shyam Shetty, supra and Jacky vs. Tiny
@ Antony, supra, has held that the appeal against the judgement
of learned Single Judge arising out of the dispute between the
landlord and the tenant under the Act of 2001 is not maintainable.