https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292773 The commentary examines whether the High Court could exercise revisional jurisdiction over an election order under the Bengal Municipal Act, 1932, and whether Sections 39B and 43 were invalid for restricting powers under the Civil Procedure Code, the Government of India Act framework, and Clause 13 of the Letters Patent. It explains that revisional power was historically linked to Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, and that after the Government of India Act, 1935, Section 224 did not preserve a general supervisory jurisdiction over inferior courts. On that basis, the municipal provisions could validly exclude revision under the Code, and any repugnancy with the Letters Patent would operate only to the extent necessary to bar revision. en-us Mon, 05 Sep 1949 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Jan 2021 18:28:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292773 The commentary examines whether the High Court could exercise revisional jurisdiction over an election order under the Bengal Municipal Act, 1932, and whether Sections 39B and 43 were invalid for restricting powers under the Civil Procedure Code, the Government of India Act framework, and Clause 13 of the Letters Patent. It explains that revisional power was historically linked to Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, and that after the Government of India Act, 1935, Section 224 did not preserve a general supervisory jurisdiction over inferior courts. On that basis, the municipal provisions could validly exclude revision under the Code, and any repugnancy with the Letters Patent would operate only to the extent necessary to bar revision. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 05 Sep 1949 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292773