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
2 paragraphs · 181 wordsSulaiman, J.—This purports to be in appeal from an order passed by the District Judge on an appeal from an appellate order of a Collector. Thus it is a third appeal to the High Court. Section 182, Agra Tenancy Act, only allows a second appeal to the High Court and not a third appeal. Section 175 bars all appeals which are not provided for. It is, therefore, clear that the appeal does not lie.
The learned vakil for the appellant relies on the case of Chhajmal Das v. Sirya (1906) 3 ALJ 625 where a learned Judge of this Court entertained a third appeal. That case was contrary to the decision in Lachmi Narain v. Nirotam Das (1906) 3 ALJ 623 reported in the same volume at p. 251, and must be deemed to have by implication been overruled by the decision of the Bench in the case of Lachmi Narain v. Nirotam Das (1906) 29 All 69 reported in the same volume at p. 272. As no appeal lies this appeal is accordingly dismissed under Order 41, Rule 11.