Mumbai Court April 1928 Judgments

BadruddIn Abdul Rahim Vs. Sitaram Vinayak Apte

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR1928Bom371; (1928)30BOMLR942; 114Ind.Cas.241

Fawcett, J.Clause 15 of the Letters Patent of this Court has been altered, so that no appeal from the judgment of one Judge of this Court lies to a Division Bench, if it is made in the exercise of second appellate jurisdiction, except in any case where such single Judge declares that it is a fit one for appeal. The question before us is whether this alteration has retrospective effect so as to apply to an appeal from the judgment of a single Judge on January 19, 1928, which was made on February 13, 1928, i.e., after the date, when the substituted 15th clause of the Letters Patent was published in the Bombay Government Gazette (February 2, 1928). Paragraph 2 of the Notification at page 197 of Part I of that Gazette says :-And we do further ordain and declare that these Letters Patent shall he published in the Bombay Gazette shall have effect from the date of such publication.1. Mr. Patwardhan contends that his client had a right of appeal to a Division Bench of this Court which had accr...