https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190010 The Supreme Court held that an appeal before a Division Bench of the High Court against an order of a Single Judge under sec. 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1960 was maintainable under clause 15 of the Letters Patent, as the Act did not expressly exclude such appeals. The Court emphasized that statutory provisions cannot override the constitutional power of a High Court unless expressly excluded. Consequently, the Court set aside the High Court's judgment, restored the appeal, and directed expedited proceedings, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the dispute. en-us Fri, 28 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Feb 2017 12:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190010 The Supreme Court held that an appeal before a Division Bench of the High Court against an order of a Single Judge under sec. 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1960 was maintainable under clause 15 of the Letters Patent, as the Act did not expressly exclude such appeals. The Court emphasized that statutory provisions cannot override the constitutional power of a High Court unless expressly excluded. Consequently, the Court set aside the High Court's judgment, restored the appeal, and directed expedited proceedings, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the dispute. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 28 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190010