Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 60 (0.78 seconds)The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
The Special Courts Act, 1979
Article 136 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
V.M. Abdul Rahman vs D.K. Cassim And Sons on 19 December, 1932
To quote the language of Sir George Lowndes
in Abdul Rahman v. D. K. Cassim and Sons, the finality must
be a finality in relation to the suit. If after the order
the suit is still a live suit in which the rights of the
parties have still to be determined, no appeal lies against
it. The fact that the order decides an important and even a
vital issue is by itself not material. If the decision on an
issue puts an end to the suit, the order will undoubtedly be
a final one, but if the suit is still left alive and has got
to be tried in the ordinary way, no finality could attach to
the order."
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 9 in The Special Courts Act, 1979 [Entire Act]
Madhu Limaye vs The State Of Maharashtra on 31 October, 1977
As has been held in Madhu
462
Limaye's case ordinarily and generally the expression
'interlocutory order' has been understood and taken to mean
as a converse of the term 'final order'.