LAWS(SC)-2003-8-89

SURYA DEV RAI Vs. RAM CHANDER RAI

Decided On August 07, 2003
SURYA DEV RAI Appellant
V/S
Ram Chander Rai And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The appellant filed a suit, for issuance of permanent preventive injunction based on his title and possession over the suit property which is a piece of agricultural land, in the Court of Civil Judge. He also sought for relief by way of ad interim injunction under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. The prayer was rejected by the trial Court as also by the appellate Court. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the appellant filed a petition (C.M.W.P. No. 20038 of 2002) in the High Court labelling it as one under Art. 226 of the Constitution. The High Court has summarily dismissed the petition forming an opinion that the petition was not maintainable as the appellant was seeking interim injunction against private respondents. Reference is made in the impugned order to a Full Bench decision of the Allahabad High Court in Ganga Saran v. Civil Judge, Hapur, 1991 All LJ 159 : AIR 1991 All 114 (F.B.). Earlier, the remedy of final civil revision under Sec. 115 C.P.C, could have been availed of by the appellant herein, but that remedy is not available to the appellant because of the amendment made in Sec. 115 C.P.C. by Amendment Act 46 of 1999 w.e.f. 1-7-2002.

(3.) This appeal raises a question of frequent occurrence before the High Courts as to what is the impact of the amendment in Sec. 115 C.P.C. brought in by Act 46 of 1999 w.e.f. 1-7-2002, on the power and jurisdiction of the High Court to entertain petitions seeking a writ of certiorari under Art. 226 of the Constitution or invoking the power of superintendence under Art. 227 of the Constitution as against similar orders, acts or proceedings of the Courts subordinate to the High Courts, against which earlier the remedy of filing civil revision under Sec. 115 C.P.C. was available to the person aggrieved. Is an aggrieved person completely deprived of the remedy of judicial review, if he has lost at the hands of the original Court and the appellate Court though a case of gross failure of justice having been occasioned, can be made out