Legal Reference Library

When the order of Single Judge of High Court is not in exercise of ordinary original jurisdiction, but in exercise of writ jurisdiction, the principal question to be decided is whether the order of Single Judge is in substance one under Art. 226 of Constitution and not under Art. 227 of Constitution. If order of Single Judge is in substance one under Art. 226 of Constitution, regardless of nomenclature used by parties in the writ petition or by Single Judge in his order, then LPA to Division Bench is maintainable. What is important is to ascertain the true nature of order passed by the Single Judge. If order of Single Judge in substance is not under Art. 226, or cannot be one under Art. 226, but is one under Art. 227 of Constitution, again regardless of nomenclature, LPA to Division Bench is not maintainable. When order of Single Judge is under both Art. 226 and Art. 227 of Constitution, again regardless of nomenclature, LPA to Division Bench is maintainable. LPA not maintain...

14. The maintainability of writ petition in a matter of landlord-tenant dispute was considered by this Court in Shalini Shyam Shetty and another v. Rajendra Shankar Patil, (2010) 8 SCC 329. In the said case, this Court noticed the scope of interference by the High Court in civil matters/private disputes under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and held that the High Court committed an error in entertaining writ petition in a dispute between landlord and tenant and where the only respondent is a private landlord. 15. Nature and scope of power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India was considered by this Court in Jai Singh and others v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and another, (2010) 9 SCC 385. In the said case, this Court held: .....The High Court is, therefore, expected to exercise such wide powers with great care, caution and circumspection Supreme Court of India Supreme Court of India Jacky vs Tiny @ Antony & Ors on 9 April, 2014 Bench: Sudhansu Jyoti Muk...

Case referred - By court 1) Supreme Court in United Bank of India vs. Satyawati Tandon, reported in AIR 2010 SC 3413 2) Baburam Prakash Chandra Maheshwari v. Antarim Zila Parishad AIR 1969 SC 556; 3) Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai (1998) 8 SCC 1 : (AIR 1999 SC 22 : 1998 AIR SCW 3345) 4) Harbanslal Sahnia and another v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and others (2003) 2 SCC 107 : (AIR 2003 SC 2120 : 2003 AIR SCW 126) Calcutta High Court Anr vs Punjab National Bank And Anr. ... on 6 May, 2014 Author: Dipankar Datta ORDER SHEET WP No.353 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S. MERCURY EXPORTERS AND MANUFACTURING PVT. LTD, & ANR Versus PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 6th May, 2014 Mr. Samit Talukdar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sakya Sen, Advocate Mr. Chanchal Kumar Dutt, Advocate Mr. Provat Sil, Advocate ..for the petitio...