In a significant ruling, the Division Bench of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court has clarified that no intra-court appeal lies under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent against a judgment passed by a Single Judge in exercise of appellate jurisdiction. The Court emphasized that Section 100-A of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) bars such appeals, overriding the Letters Patent provision.
Brief facts:
The matter arose from a motor accident claim where the petitioner was initially awarded ₹5,45,600 with 7.5% annual interest by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. However, on appeal, a Single Judge of the High Court reduced the compensation to ₹2,33,200, while maintaining the rate of interest. Aggrieved by the reduction, the petitioner approached the Division Bench through an intra-court appeal under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent.
Issue before the court:
Whether an intra Court appeal under Clause 12 of Letters Patent is maintainable against an order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction whether against an original or appellate decree or order passed by the Courts subordinate to the High Court?
Observations of the court:
The Court observed that “Going by the bare provisions of Clause 12 of Letters Patent, an appeal against an order or Judgment of learned Single Judge passed in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction in respect of a decree or order made by the Court subordinate to the High Court on the original side is maintainable. However, Section 100-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, creates a bar against the maintainability of appeal under Clause 12 of Letters Patent against an order and Judgment passed by the learned Single Judge in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction against an order or decree of the Court below passed, either in the exercise of original or appellate jurisdiction.”
It was furthermore observed that from the plain reading of Section 100-A, it is evident that the “non-abstante” clause i.e., “notwithstanding” gives Section 100-A overriding effect over the Letters Patent of this Court. It establishes the precedence of S.100 A over Clause 12 of Letters Patent to the extent of conflict.
Based on these considerations, the court was of the opinion that in view of the Section 100-A further appeal is not maintainable.
The decision of the court:
Dismissing the appeal, the Court held that the impugned judgment by the Single Judge could not be challenged before the Division Bench in light of the express bar under Section 100-A CPC.
Case Title: Attiqa Bano V. National Insurance Company Limited
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Parihar
Case No.:LPA No. 225/2023 in [Mac App No. 69/2021] C/w LPA No. 224/2023
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
