NITYANANDA AYTO STORES Vs. BIRLA TYRES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the appellant on the question of maintainability of this appeal.

(2.) FOLLOWING the amendment brought to the Karnataka High Court act, 1964, and the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964, by the Karnataka act N. o. 26 of 2007, which has been published in the Gazette on 28-8-2007, the office has raised an objection with regard to the maintainability of this appeal as the value of the suit property is more than Rs. 1,00,000;/- and as such, in view of the change in the pecuniary jurisdiction effected by the amending Act, the office has opined that this appeal is not maintainable before this Court.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the appellant Shri Vijay Krishna Bhat submitted that the office objection is not sustainable because once a suit is instituted, it also implies that all the rights of appeal then in force are preserved to the parties thereto till rest of the carrier (sic career) of the suit and he further contended that the right of appeal is a vested right and such a right to enter the superior Court accrues to the litigant and exits as on and from the date the lis commences and therefore, the said vested right of appeal can be taken away only by a subsequent enactment, if it so provides expressly or by necessary intendment and not otherwise. Relying on the above proposition of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case reported in AIR 1957 SC 540 and also drawing support from another decision of Calcutta High Court reported in AIR 1977 Calcutta 43, it was contended by the learned Counsel that as the right of appeal cannot be taken away, the present appeal that is filed will have to be heard by this court and as such, the office objection will have to be over ruled.