AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 283 wordsN.D. Ojha, C.J.
A writ petition, being M.P. No. 3607/86 was decided by us on 21-3-87. The present application purporting to be under Article 133(1) of the Constitution, was filed on 22-6-87, i.e. after about three months with the prayer that certificate of fitness for appeal to the Supreme Court of India may be granted.
Article 134A inserted in the Constitution by the Constitution (44th Amendment) Act 1978 contemplates grant of a certificate of the nature referred to, inter alia, in Clause (1) of Article 133 of the Constitution, provided oral application is made by or on behalf of the party aggrieved immediately after the passing or making of the judgment, decree or final order referred to therein. A corresponding amendment was made in Article 133(1) of the Constitution also and the relevant portion of the said Article after this amendment reads :
"An appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from any judgment, decree or final order in a civil proceeding of a High Court in the territory of India if the High Court certifies under Article 134A........"
After the aforesaid amendment introduced by the Constitution (44th Amendment) Act 1978, therefore, the power of certifying a case as contemplated by Article 133(1) of the Constitution, can be exercised in the manner contemplated by Article 134A.
In the instant case, as seen above, no oral application as contemplated by the said Article 134A, was made immediately after the passing of the order in the writ petition on 21-3-1987. In our opinion, this written application made after about three months of the passing of the said order, is not maintainable.
The application is accordingly dismissed. C.C. may be supplied on payment of usual charges.