SHRIDHAR RAO Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS raises the question whether a Letter patent Appeal would lie against the judgment of a single Judge of this High Court disposing of Second Appeal arising out of the area, which was part of the erstwhile Hyderabad State but now included in the Andhra Pradesh State.

(2.) ON 21 -11 -1956, Ansari J., allowed S.A. No 84/1 of 1956 setting aside the decree of the appeal late Court and restoring that of the trial Court. At the time the judgment was delivered, no request was made to the learned Judge for leave to prefer a Letters Patent Appeal. But, on 13 -2 -1957, the respondents in the appeal presented a Letters Patent Appeal to this Court and also an application for granting them leave to prefer the appeal. The office raised an objection as regards the maintainability of both the appeal and the petition for excusing the delay. As many Letters Patent Appeals have been filed under similar circumstances and some more are likely to be filed, this case has been posted for an authoritative ruling of this Court. Clause 15 of the Letters Patent issued under Acts 24 and 25 Victoria governs the right of a party to prefer an appeal from the judgment of a single Judge of the Madras High Court in exercise of second appellate jurisdiction to the said High Court. The relevant part of the clause reads :

(3.) THE State of Andhra came into existence on 1st October, 1953. Under S. 30 of the Andhra State Act, the High Court of Andhra shall have in respect of the territories for the time being included in the State of Andhra all such original, appellate and other jurisdiction as under law in force immediately before the prescribed day is exercisable in respect of the said territories or any part thereof by the High Court at Madras. Section 32, which provides for practice and procedure in the Andhra High Court, says :