BHAGWAN SINGH Vs. CHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER PUNJAB JULLUNDUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS, order will dispose of two connected S. C. A. 's Nos. 146 and 169 of 1966 in which the same point is involved.

(2.) THE question for decision is whether a petitioner, whose writ petition has been dismissed in limine and the value of the property involved therein is Rs. 20,000 or more, is entitled, as a matter of right, to get leave for filing an appeal to the Supreme Court. This would depend upon the interpretation to be placed on the Supreme Court decision in Ramesh v. Gendalal Motilal, AIR 1966 SC 1445. There one of the questions debated was whether an order dismissing a writ petition in limine was a "judgment, decree or final order" as mentioned in Article 133 of the Constitution. The argument of the counsel for the appellants in that case was that such an order was not a 'judgment, decree or final order' firstly, because it said nothing about the merits of the controversy and it could, therefore, not amount to the kind of determination which those words contemplated and, secondly, it did not of its own force affect the rights of the parties or finally put an end to the controversy. This is also the argument of Mr. M. Rule Sharma, who appeared in the present case on behalf of the Advocate General to whom notice had been issued by this Court. While repelling this contention, the Supreme Court observed thus :-

(3.) RELIANCE was placed by Mr. Sharma on the following passage in the Supreme Court decision in Daryao v. State of U. P. , AIR 1961 SC 1457:-