Lawrence Jenkins, CJ.
[1] This is an appeal from an order of. Mr. Justice Stephen under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. An application was made to the learned Judge for a Rule, calling on the opposite party to show cause why an order of the Small Cause Court should not be set aside. The learned Judge refused to grant the Rule. It is from that order of refusal that the present appeal is preferred.
[2] A preliminary objection has been taken that no appeal lies. Certainly it does not lie under the Code. The only question is whether it lies under the Letters Patent. But in order that it may lie under the Letters Patent there must be a judgment. In my opinion, the order of which complaint is made cannot be regarded as a judgment. Therefore, I think the preliminary objection must prevail and this appeal must be dismissed with costs.
Woodroffe, J.
[3] I agree.
Peary Lall Daw v. Banamali Dey
Peary Lall Daw v. Banamali Dey
(High Court Of Judicature At Calcutta)
No. | 21-06-1911
Advocate List
Bench
- HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. LAWRENCE JENKINS
- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WOODROFFE
Eq Citations
- 30 IND. CAS. 862
- LQ/CalHC/1911/300
Head Note
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — S. 115 — Appeal against order refusing to issue Rule Nisi — Held, order of refusal not a judgment and hence no appeal lies under S. 115 — Penal Code, 1860 — S. 420 — Evidence Act, 1872, S. 11
