PARAMASIVAM PILLAI Vs. PERIYANAYAGATH AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We must admit that there is much to be said for the contention of the appellant that an inferior Court has no power of review except when it is granted by Statute. [See Hurra Fukeer Doss Bera v. Fukeer Doss Bera 20 W.R. 180 and Drew v. Willis. (1891) 1 Q.B. 450 : 60 L.J.Q.B. 264 : 64 L.T. 760 : 39 W.R. 310 : 55 J.P. 373 and Damodra Nadar v. Manicka Vachaka Desika Ganana Pandara Sannadhi 3 Ind. Cas. 463 : 33 M. 65 : 6 M.L.T. 177 : 19 M.L.J. 725.] But it is unnecessary to express a final opinion on this matter, as we think that the learned Judge from whose decision this Letters Patent Appeal has been filed had a discretion to interfere under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure and we have also the like discretion, and we do not think that this is a fit case to so interfere.

(2.) In so declining, we must guard ourselves from intending to express a considered view that the order of the District Munsif passed under Section 73 of the Village Courts Act is subject to revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. If it is not subject to review under that section and if it can be revised only under Section 15 of the Charter Act, we are not prepared in this case to invoke the extraordinary powers under the Charter Act.

(3.) The appeal is dismissed with costs.