SARASWATI Vs. VASANT RAMACHANDRA DULLOLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE writ appeals arise from different and independent orders passed by the learned single Judge in the respective writ petitions. In these cases though parties are different, orders are unrelated, basically before the learned single judge various orders of Civil Courts have been challenged invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 or Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The learned single Judge, who dealt with the respective writ petitions, has passed independent orders and aggrieved by the same, the individual parties have filed these writ appeals.

(2.) THOUGH there is nothing common in respect of the decisions of the learned single judge in these writ petitions, they have been taken together for consideration, in the following peculiar circumstance. After filing the writ appeals, the Registry of the High Court has raised question of maintainability in each of these appeals, following a Full Bench judgment of this court in the case of Gurushanth pattedar v. Mahaboob Shahi Kalburga Mills and Another reported in ILR 2005 Karnataka 2503 : (2005 AIR - Kant HCR 1633 ). In the judgment in the case of Gurushant Pattedar the Full Bench consisting of five Hon'ble judges, have held that intra Court appeal lies under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court act 1961 ('the Act' for a short) only against the order of the learned single Judge passed in exercise of original jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and not in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction under article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) ON raising this question of maintainability by the Registry, the respective advocates for appellants have prayed for placing the matter before the Court to clarify the position and thus, these matters are before us.