RAJESH KUMAR AGARWALLA Vs. YAN TIKHAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This letters patent appeal arises out of judgment and order dated 13.8.97 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Misc. Appeal (F) No. 113/97, thereby dismissing the said appeal on the ground that the suit as filed by the plaintiff appellant before the Deputy Commissioner was itself not maintainable. The reasoning employed by the learned Single Judge is contained in paragraph 9 of the impugned order. It is quoted below:

(2.) Mr. P.G. Baruah, learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1, raised a preliminary objection contending that this appeal was not maintainable inasmuch as the learned Single Judge who passed the impugned judgment, refused to declare that the case was a fit one for appeal as required under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. On the other hand, Shri B.K. Goswami, learned senior counsel for the appellant, submitted that a plain reading of clause 15 along with Rule 3 in Chapter VIII of the Gauhati High Court Rules would make it clear that even without such a declaration this appeal is maintainable, the impugned judgment not being a judgment in respect of a judgment passed in exercise of appellate jurisdiction by a Court subject to the superintendence of this High Court.

(3.) The relevant portion of clause 15 reads as under: