KARTHIAYANI Vs. RAMANATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision petitioners have invoked Section 415 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the orders rejecting their applications filed under Order VI Rule 17 C.P.C. seeking amendment of the plaint. Court took the view that if those applications are allowed the same would alter the nature of the suit and also cause prejudice to the defendants. Respondents took up a preliminary objection stating that these Revision Petitions are not maintainable in view of the CPC Amendment Act, 46 of 1999. In view of the amendment, interlocutory orders passed by Courts subordinate to High Court which does not have effect of final disposal of suit or proceedings cannot be challenged before High Court under Section 115 of the CPC.

(2.) The question whether under such circumstance the power under Articles 226 and 227 can be exercised came up for consideration before me Apex Court in Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai, 2003 (3) KLT 490 (SC). Apex Court has laid down various guideline with regard to the powers of the High Courts under Articles 226 and 226 which are extracted below for easy reference.

(3.) Certiorari, under Article 226 of the Constitution, is issued for correcting gross errors of jurisdiction, ie., when a subordinate court is found to have acted (i) without jurisdiction --by assuming jurisdiction where there exists none, or (ii) in excess of its jurisdiction -- by overstepping or crossing the limits of jurisdiction, or (iii) acting in flagrant disregard of law or the rules of procedure or acting in violation of principles of natural justice where there is no procedure specified, and thereby occasioning failure of justice.