The High Court held that an appeal against a Single Judge's order supervising an order of a Civil Court is not maintainable. The Court applied Radhey Shyam, observing that civil orders fall under Article 227, not 226, thus dismissing the appeal.
The appeal was dismissed as not maintainable.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2023/RJJP/012235]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 472/2023
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2141/2022
Purushottam Lal S/o Shri Charan Singh, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Sirsoda Ward No. 24 Nagar Palika, Roopbas, Tehsil And Thana - Roopbas, District - Bharatpur (Raj.)
----Appellant
Versus
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Purushottam Lal, appellant in person.
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Judgment
26/05/2023
Heard.
This appeal has been filed assailing the correctness of order dated 05.04.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge by which the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition setting aside the order of the Trial Court by which appellant’s application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was allowed.
[2023/RJJP/012235]
[SAW-472/2023]
At the outset, we noticed that the order assailed before the learned Single Judge was one passed by the Civil Court. Therefore, the petition before the learned Single Judge was essentially a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as an order passed by the Civil Court is not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhey Shyam & Another Versus Chhabi Nath & Others, (2015) 5 Supreme Court 423 .
Therefore, instant appeal against the order of the learned Single Judge arising out of supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable and the same is, therefore, dismissed as not maintainable.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ SANJAY KUMAWAT-10
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an appeal against an order of the learned Single Judge arising from supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is maintainable.
Whether an order passed by the Civil Court is amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Radhey Shyam & Another Versus Chhabi Nath & OthersApplied¶22
Radhey Shyam & Another Versus Chhabi Nath & Others, (2015) 5 Supreme Court 423
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Purushottam Lal
State Of Rajasthan
District Election Officer
Election Officer
Smt Archana
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
Anil Kumar Upman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
