Kalka Prasad Vs. Panna

Kalka Prasad vs Panna

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Dec 11, 1925

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/474399

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/474399
Court: Allahabad
Decided On: Dec 11, 1925
Subject: Tenancy

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Key legal issue: Tenancy

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Kalka Prasad

Respondent

Panna

Legal References

Cases Referred: Lachmi Narain v. Nirotam Das
Reported In: AIR1926All233; 92Ind.Cas.3

Excerpt

- sulaiman, j.1. this purports to be in appeal from an order passed by the district judge on an appeal from an appellate order of a collector. thus it is a third appeal to the high court. section 182, agra tenancy act, only allows a second appeal to the high court and not a third appeal. section 175 bars all appeals which are not provided for. it is, therefore, clear that the appeal does not lie.2. the learned vakil for the appellant relies on the case of chhajmal das v. sirya (1906) 3 alj 625 where a learned judge of this court entertained a third appeal. that case was contrary to the decision in lachmi narain v. nirotam das (1906) 3 alj 623 reported in the same volume at p. 251, and must be deemed to have by implication been overruled by the decision of the bench in the case of lachmi narain v. nirotam das (1906) 29 all 69 reported in the same volume at p. 272. as no appeal lies this appeal is accordingly dismissed under order 41, rule 11.

Full Judgment

Sulaiman, J.

1. This purports to be in appeal from an order passed by the District Judge on an appeal from an appellate order of a Collector. Thus it is a third appeal to the High Court. Section 182, Agra Tenancy Act, only allows a second appeal to the High Court and not a third appeal. Section 175 bars all appeals which are not provided for. It is, therefore, clear that the appeal does not lie.

2. The learned vakil for the appellant relies on the case of Chhajmal Das v. Sirya (1906) 3 ALJ 625 where a learned Judge of this Court entertained a third appeal. That case was contrary to the decision in Lachmi Narain v. Nirotam Das (1906) 3 ALJ 623 reported in the same volume at p. 251, and must be deemed to have by implication been overruled by the decision of the Bench in the case of Lachmi Narain v. Nirotam Das (1906) 29 All 69 reported in the same volume at p. 272. As no appeal lies this appeal is accordingly dismissed under Order 41, Rule 11.

Same Parties Kalka Prasad vs Panna Same Subject Tenancy

Tenancy