(1.) Before we dispose of the application finally we think it is necessary to get an authoritative decision by a Full Bench on the meaning of the words "substantial question of law" ocourring in Article 133, Constitution of India. In Mahadeva Royal v. Chikka Royal, 1942-1 M.L.J. 309, Pandrang Row and Abdur Rahman JJ. held that a question is a substantial question of law if the question of law affects the rights of the parties substantially. At page 310 the learned Judges say :
(2.) Mr Narasaraju relied upon the decision of the Judicial Committee in Raghunath Prasad Singh v. Deputy Commr. of Partabgarh, 2 Luck. 93, in support of his argument. But in that judgment the Judicial Committee only decided that a substantial question of law does not mean a question of general importance but a substantial question of law between the parties. It did not purport to decide that any question of law, however flimsy and covered by authority, is a substantial question of law if it substantially affects the rights of parties. To avoid unnecessary conflict of decisions, we think that this is a fit case for referring the following question to a Full Bench : "Whether the words
(3.) The question referred for decision by a Pull Bench runs as follows :