GANGA RAM Vs. MT. SARADHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition for grant of certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision of my learned predecessor dated 4 -6 -1951 in second appeal 6 of 1950. During the pendency of the application the trial Court was directed to estimate the value of the subject -matter of the suit. This has been done. The Senior Subordinate Judge of Bilaspur has reported that the market value of the land in suit is Rs.11,675/ -. This valuation has not been disputed by the parties. Having regard, therefore, to the provisions of Article 133(1)(a) and (b) of the Constitution, an appeal to the Supreme Court is not competent under those provisions.

(2.) IT is true that the suit giving rise to the petition was filed before the present Constitution came into force. As was pointed out, however, by me in - Pohlo v. Mt. Basanti, AIR 1954 Bilaspur 1 (A), appeals to the Supreme Court would be regulated by the provisions of Article 133 of the Constitution, irrespective of when the suit was originally instituted. I am supported in this view by a decision of the Supreme Court, reported in - Nathoo Lal v. Durga Prasad, (B), where their Lordships observed that: "Plaintiff preferred a second appeal to the High Court of Jaipur. The appeal was allowed. The defendant applied for a review of this judgment. Meanwhile the Jaipur High Court had become defunct and the review was heard by the Rajasthan High Court as successor to the Jaipur High Court under the High Courts Ordinance and was partially allowed on the 5th of April 1950 and the decree was accordingly amended. It was against this judgment and decree passed after the coming into force of the Constitution of India that the present appeal had been preferred to the Supreme Court by leave of the Rajasthan High Court under Article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution: