Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court Rules No Intra-Court Appeal for Single Judge Judgments</h1> <h3>Mohd. Riyazur Rehman Siddiqui Versus Deputy Director of Health Services</h3> The court held that post-amendment to Section 100A of the Code of Civil Procedure, no Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) is maintainable against judgments by a ... - Issues Involved:1. Maintainability of Letters Patent Appeal post-amendment to Section 100A of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. Applicability of Section 100A to appeals under special statutes like the Motor Vehicles Act.3. Nature and jurisdiction of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.4. Legislative intent behind Section 100A and its impact on intra-Court appeals.Detailed Analysis:1. Maintainability of Letters Patent Appeal Post-Amendment to Section 100A of the Code of Civil Procedure:The core issue was whether, after the amendment to Section 100A of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) effective from July 1, 2002, a Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) against the judgment rendered by a Single Judge of the High Court is maintainable. The court held that Section 100A, which includes a non-obstante clause, explicitly bars further appeals from judgments or decrees passed by a Single Judge in appellate jurisdiction. The legislative intent was to minimize the delay in finality of decisions by restricting the right to intra-Court appeals. The court concluded that no LPA would be maintainable against the judgment of a Single Judge under the amended Section 100A of the CPC.2. Applicability of Section 100A to Appeals Under Special Statutes Like the Motor Vehicles Act:The court examined whether appeals arising from special statutes like the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, would be maintainable under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the judgment passed by a Single Judge. It was noted that the Motor Vehicles Act does not provide for a second appeal. The court emphasized that the right to appeal is a statutory right and cannot be assumed or inferred in the absence of explicit provisions. The court held that appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, decided by a Single Judge, are not subject to further intra-Court appeals due to the bar imposed by Section 100A of the CPC.3. Nature and Jurisdiction of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal:The court assessed whether the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) possesses the trappings of a Civil Court. It was determined that the MACT, though not a Civil Court in the strict sense, has the trappings of one, as it exercises judicial functions, can summon witnesses, record evidence, and pass orders akin to a Civil Court. The MACT's awards are considered judgments or orders. The appellate jurisdiction exercised by the High Court under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act involves applying the CPC provisions, thus aligning with the characteristics of a Civil Court.4. Legislative Intent Behind Section 100A and Its Impact on Intra-Court Appeals:The court highlighted the legislative intent behind the introduction of Section 100A, which was to curtail the right to a second appeal and to ensure the finality of judgments passed by Single Judges in appellate jurisdiction. The non-obstante clause in Section 100A overrides other laws, including the Letters Patent. The court emphasized that the legislative scheme aimed to reduce litigation and expedite the judicial process by limiting the scope of appeals. Consequently, the court held that the provisions of Section 100A take precedence over Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, thereby barring intra-Court appeals against judgments rendered by Single Judges in appellate jurisdiction.Conclusion:The court concluded that post-amendment to Section 100A of the CPC, no LPA is maintainable against the judgment rendered by a Single Judge of the High Court in appellate jurisdiction, including those under the Motor Vehicles Act. The legislative intent to restrict intra-Court appeals and ensure the finality of decisions is clear and unambiguous, thus overriding the provisions of the Letters Patent. The appeals in question were dismissed as non-maintainable.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found