Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an order remanding a matter for retrial is a final order for the purpose of an appeal under Article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution of India, and whether a certificate of fitness could be granted on that basis.
Analysis: An order is final only if it conclusively determines the rights of the parties in the civil proceeding. Where the proceeding remains to be tried afresh and the parties' rights are still to be adjudicated, a remand order does not amount to a final order. The High Court's direction for retrial on amended pleadings and all issues left the dispute open for fresh determination, so it did not satisfy the constitutional requirement for an appeal. The view that a certificate could issue merely because the remand order was passed in exercise of inherent powers was rejected.
Conclusion: The remand order was not a final order within Article 133(1)(c), and the certificate of fitness was wrongly granted.
Final Conclusion: The appeals failed because the constitutional condition for appeal was not met, and the High Court's certificate was vacated.
Ratio Decidendi: A remand order directing a fresh trial and leaving the parties' rights undecided is not a final order for the purpose of appellate jurisdiction under Article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution of India.