TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court rules new Letters Patent not retroactive; appeal allowed based on suit institution date.</h1> <h3>Sadar Ali and Ors. Versus Doliluddin Ostagar</h3> Sadar Ali and Ors. Versus Doliluddin Ostagar - (1929) ILR 56Cal 512 Issues Involved:1. Right of appeal from the decision of a single Judge under the new Letters Patent.2. Retrospective application of the new Letters Patent.3. Interpretation of the new Letters Patent in relation to pending suits.4. Effect of Section 111 of the Civil Procedure Code on the new Letters Patent.Detailed Analysis:1. Right of Appeal from the Decision of a Single Judge under the New Letters PatentThe primary issue is whether the applicants have a right of appeal from the decision of a single Judge sitting in second appeal without a certificate from him that the case is fit for appeal. The new Letters Patent, effective from 14th January 1928, substituted the 15th clause of the previous Letters Patent, which impacts the applicants' right to appeal. The applicants argue that the new clause should not apply retrospectively as it would impair a substantive right existing prior to 14th January 1928.2. Retrospective Application of the New Letters PatentThe applicants contend that applying the new clause retrospectively would defeat a substantive right. They cite Colonial Sugar Refining Co. v. Irving [1905] A.C. 369, which is applicable in India, emphasizing that rights of appeal are substantive and not procedural. The judgment references several Indian cases, including Delhi Cloth Co. v. Income-tax Commissioner and Nana v. Sheku [1908] 32 Bom. 337, to support this view.3. Interpretation of the New Letters Patent in Relation to Pending SuitsThe court examines whether the new Letters Patent should apply to suits instituted before 14th January 1928. The applicants argue that their right to a Letters Patent appeal from a single Judge's decision was a substantive right vested at the date of the suit's institution. The court discusses the reasoning in Framji v. Hormasji [1866] 3 B.H.C.R. 49 and subsequent cases, noting that the right of appeal is considered a substantive right arising at the date of the suit.4. Effect of Section 111 of the Civil Procedure Code on the New Letters PatentSection 111 of the Civil Procedure Code prohibits an appeal to the Privy Council from a single Judge, overriding Clause 39 of the Letters Patent. The court acknowledges that the new clause in the Letters Patent removes the right to appeal to the Privy Council in second appeals decided by a single Judge without a certificate. This change impacts pending cases, as it takes away existing rights of appeal.ConclusionThe court concludes that the new Letters Patent cannot be applied retrospectively to pending cases without taking away existing rights of appeal. The provision that the new Letters Patent shall come into force on the date of publication in the Gazette does not imply retrospective effect. The court rules that the date of institution of the suit is the determining factor for the applicability of the amended clause. Therefore, the rule is made absolute, allowing the appeal to be accepted and registered, but without costs.Separate JudgmentsAll judges (C.C. Ghose, Suhrawardy, B.B. Ghose, and Page) concurred with the judgment delivered by Rankin, C.J., agreeing with the conclusions reached.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
