SUKHBIR SINGH versus (ALLEGED) C/M JANTA INTER COLLEGE & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

---

Sukhbir Singh v. (Alleged) C/M Janta Inter College & Others - SPECIAL APPEAL No. 460 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 9839 (18 May 2006)

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

CJ's Court

Special Appeal No.460 of 2006

Sukhbir Singh

Vs.

(Alleged) Committee of Management, Janta Inter College, Nagla Mohan, District Etah and others

Hon'ble Ajoy Nath Ray, CJ.

Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, J.

The writ petition of the private respondents was substantially dismissed by the Hon'ble Single Judge in his Lordship's judgment and order dated 20.4.2006.

His Lordship recorded that an earlier writ petition was also filed, which was dismissed in regard to the same dispute about two parallel Committees of Management. In the earlier writ petition, an amendment application had been dismissed.

His Lordship did not favour the filing of a second writ petition for substantially the same relief. Also the judgment indicates that disputed questions of facts were found to exist and a Suit was found to be the only possible remedy open to the writ petitioner in those circumstances.

So far, with respect, we have nothing to say about the judgment, which is impugned before us.

However, at the very end of the judgement, the following order was passed:-

"In the circumstances, the authorised controller shall be appointed by respondent no.2, Regional Joint Director of Education, Agra Region, Agra for managing the affairs of the Institution in question till the dispute is finally decided through Civil Court".

The above order is substantially an interlocutory order passed in aid of prospective suit, which has not yet been filed. If no suit is filed, it is unknown how long this order will continue. If a suit is filed, the order would take away the jurisdiction from the Suit Court to pass an interlocutory order, as might appear to it just and proper.

In these circumstances, only the quoted portion of the impugned order is struck out; the rest of the judgment and order is affirmed.

The appeal is thus allowed. It is clarified that it is allowed without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties if and when they choose to have the disputed facts thrashed out before any legal forum including a Suit Court.

Dt/-18.5.2006

RKK/-

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.