LACHHMAN SINGH Vs. SURTI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent filed a suit for recovery of rent against the petitioner. In the suit one of the issues framed was in respect of the ownership of the respondent. The trial court found against respondent and thus dismissed the suit vide order dated 10.4.2001. The respondent aggrieved by the same filed a first appeal and in terms of the impugned order dated 16.10.2001 the respondent has been held entitled to recover of arrears of rent from the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner had initially filed a regular second appeal but in view of the amendment to the provisions of Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (herein-after referred to as the said Code) the second appeal was held as not maintainable and was dismissed by the order dated 24.11.2004 The petitioner thereafter filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that even if the second appeal is deleted from the statute by the Legislature, the scope of judicial scrutiny under Article 227 of the Constitution of India still remains. In this behalf, learned counsel has referred to the judgment of the Apex Court in State of West Bengal v. AtulKrishna Shaw and Anr; 1991 Supp (1) SCC 414 where it was observed in para 7 as under: