1953 JTR(P&H) 41
1955 28 ITR 392
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Kapur and Sone JJ.
L.Lachman Das Nayar
Versus
Income-tax Officer, Amritsar
Civil Writ No. 147 of 1952,
Decided On : MAY 29, 1953
The judgment established the jurisdiction and scope of Article 226 in Income-tax cases and the applicability of section 109(b) and (c) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Act
Referred
:CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE : S.109(b), S.109(c), S.110, O.45 R.2, O.45 R.3
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA : Art.132(1), Art.133(1)(c)
Appeal - Jurisdiction - Writ under Article 226 - Scope of Article 226 in Income-tax cases
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners applied for a writ under Article 226 which was dismissed by the Bench. The petitioners sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Finding of the Court:
The court granted leave to appeal under section 109(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure and section 109(c) as the scope of Article 226 in Income-tax cases had to be determined.
Issues: Scope of Article 226 in Income-tax cases, jurisdiction of the court
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgment of the Madras High Court in Royts of Garabandho, Sariapalli etc. v. Zamindar of Parlakimedi, which held that proceedings for the issuing of a writ of certiorari are original civil jurisdiction as opposed to criminal jurisdiction.
Final Decision: Leave to appeal was granted to the petitioners with costs in their favor.
Appeal - Jurisdiction - Writ under Article 226 - Scope of Article 226 in Income-tax cases
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners applied for a writ under Article 226 which was dismissed by the Bench. The petitioners sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Finding of the Court:
The court granted leave to appeal under section 109(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure and section 109(c) as the scope of Article 226 in Income-tax cases had to be determined.
Issues: Scope of Article 226 in Income-tax cases, jurisdiction of the court
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgment of the Madras High Court in Royts of Garabandho, Sariapalli etc. v. Zamindar of Parlakimedi, which held that proceedings for the issuing of a writ of certiorari are original civil jurisdiction as opposed to criminal jurisdiction.
Final Decision: Leave to appeal was granted to the petitioners with costs in their favor.
Judgment
KAPUR & SONE, J.
1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court under article 132(1) read with article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution of India and sections 109(b) and (c) and 110 and Order XLY, rules 2 and 3, of the Code of Civil Procedure.
2. The present petitioners applied for issuing of a writ under article 226 which petition was dismissed by this Bench on the 15th of September, 1952. Counsel for the petitioner submits that this falls under section 109(b) of the code of Civil Procedure read with the relevant provisions of the Constitution, and he relies on a judgment of the Madras High Court in Royts of Garabandho, Sariapalli etc. v. Zamindar of Parlakimedi. There it was held that proceedings for the issuing of a writ of certiorari are original civil jurisdiction as opposed to criminal jurisdiction. Following this judgment we give leave to appeal under section 109(b) of the Code.
3. The case also falls under section 109(c) as the scope of article 226 in Income-tax cases has to be determined.
4. The petitioner will have costs in this Court. Counsel fee Rs. 100. Leave to appeal granted.