https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173074 The Representation of the People Act, 1951 and Article 329(b) were treated as creating a self-contained election-dispute code, with trial vested in a Single Judge of the High Court and an express appeal only from final orders under Sections 98 and 99. Because the statute made no provision for an appeal from interlocutory orders, ordinary appellate rights under the Letters Patent were excluded by necessary implication. The consequence stated in the text is that a Letters Patent appeal against an interlocutory order in an election petition was not maintainable and the Division Bench had no jurisdiction to entertain it. en-us Wed, 17 Feb 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Sep 2015 16:53:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173074 The Representation of the People Act, 1951 and Article 329(b) were treated as creating a self-contained election-dispute code, with trial vested in a Single Judge of the High Court and an express appeal only from final orders under Sections 98 and 99. Because the statute made no provision for an appeal from interlocutory orders, ordinary appellate rights under the Letters Patent were excluded by necessary implication. The consequence stated in the text is that a Letters Patent appeal against an interlocutory order in an election petition was not maintainable and the Division Bench had no jurisdiction to entertain it. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 17 Feb 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173074