https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424447 A direction under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act requiring deposit of part of the compensation amount pending appeal was treated as an interlocutory order because it operated only as a procedural adjunct to the appeal and did not finally determine the parties' rights. Applying the distinction between final, intermediate and interlocutory orders, the court held that the deposit direction neither decided the appeal on merits nor brought the proceedings to an end. Revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was therefore not maintainable against that order. en-us Tue, 21 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Jun 2022 17:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424447 A direction under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act requiring deposit of part of the compensation amount pending appeal was treated as an interlocutory order because it operated only as a procedural adjunct to the appeal and did not finally determine the parties' rights. Applying the distinction between final, intermediate and interlocutory orders, the court held that the deposit direction neither decided the appeal on merits nor brought the proceedings to an end. Revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was therefore not maintainable against that order. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 21 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424447