MANU/SC/0559/2003

True Court CopyTM English

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 6110 of 2003 [Arising out of SLP (C) No. 12492 of 2002]

Decided On: 07.08.2003

Appellants: Surya Dev Rai Vs. Respondent: Ram Chander Rai and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
R.C. Lahoti and Ashok Bhan

JUDGMENT

R.C. Lahoti, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant filed a suit, for issuance of permanent preventive injunction based on his title and possession over the suit property which is a piece of agricultural land, in the Court of Civil Judge. He also sought for relief by way of ad interim injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the C.P.C. The prayer was rejected by the trial court as also by the appellate court. Feeling aggrieved thereby the appellant filed a petition (C.M.W.P.No. 20038 of 2002) In the High Court labeling it as one under Article 226 of the Constitution. The High Court has summarily dismissed the petition forming an opinion that the petition was not maintainable as the appellant was seeking interim injunction against private respondents. Reference is made in the impugned order to a Full Bench decision Allahabad High Court in Ganga Saran v. Civil Judge, Hapur, Ghaziabad and Ors. MANU/UP/0025/1991 : AIR1991All114 . Earlier the remedy of final civil revision under Section 115 of the C.P.C. could have been availed of by the appellant herein but that remedy is not available to the appellant because of the amendment made in Section 115 of the C.P.C. by Amendment Act 46 of 1999 w.e.f. 01.07.2002.

3. This appeal raises a question of frequent occurrence before the High Courts as to what is the impact of the amendment in Section 115 of the C.P.C. brought in by Act 46 of 1999 w.e.f. 01.07.2002, on the power and jurisdiction of the High Court to entertain petitions seeking a writ of certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution or invoking the power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution as against similar orders, acts or proceedings of the courts subordinate to the High Courts, against which earlier the remedy of filing civil revision under Section 115 of the C.P.C. was available to the person aggrieved. Is an aggrieved person completely deprived of the remedy of judicial review, if he has lost at the hands of the original court and the appellate court though a case of gross failure of justice having been occasioned, can be made out?

4. Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure as amended does not now permit a revision petition being filed against an order disposing of an appeal against the order of the trial court whether confirming, reversing mor modifying the order of injunction granted by the trial court. The reason is that the order of the High Court passed either way would not have the effect of finally disposing of the suit or other proceedings. The exercise of revisional jurisdiction in such a case is taken away by the