DEOKI NANDAN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court from an order of an appellate Bench of this Court dated 25-10-1957, dismissing an appeal from an order of the Court on its original side rejecting a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. It is common ground that the order of this Court involves directly or indirectly a claim respecting property of a value much in excess of Rs. 20,000 and the applicant contends that he is entitled an of right to a certificate under Article 133 (1) of the Constitution. This claim is resisted by the respondents on the ground that as the order of this Court on its appellate side affirmed the decision of the Court on its original side, it is necessary for the Court further to certify that the appeal involves some substantial question of law; and that no such question arises.

(2.) Now Clause (1) of Article 133, so far as is material for the present purpose, reads thus :

(3.) The provisions of Article 133 (1) of the Constitution are derived from Sections 109 and 110 of the Code of Civil Procedure. That Code assumes the existence of a hierarchy of courts on the basis of Acts such as the Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act. In this hierarchy the High Court is one court, the functions of which may Be performed by a Judge sitting singly or by a Bench of Judges; as the Madras High Court said in Jamna Das v. Sabapathy Chetty, ILR 36 Mad 138 (A), when considering an argument that a particular appeal lay to the original side of the Court :