UPADHYAYA HARGOVIND DEVSHANKER versus DHIRENDRASINH VIRBHADRASINHJI SOLANKI & OTHERS

UPADHYAYA HARGOVIND DEVSHANKER versus DHIRENDRASINH VIRBHADRASINHJI SOLANKI & OTHERS

An appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent of the High Court does not lie from an interlocutory order of a Single Judge passed in an election petition filed under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Act constitutes a complete code and limits the right of appeal to orders under section 98 or 99, with further appeal only to the Supreme Court under section 116-A. Division Benches of the High Court have no jurisdiction to hear such appeals.

Parties
Appellant: Upadhyaya Hargovind Devshanker; Respondent No.1: Dhirendrasinh Virbhadrasinhji Solanki; Respondents: Respondents Nos. 2 to 6
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
17 February 1988
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Hearing Appeal Against Gujarat High Court Division Bench Judgment in Letters Patent Appeal Arising From Election Petition
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Maintainability of Letters Patent Appeal, Appeals Against Interlocutory Orders in Election Petitions, Jurisdiction of High Court Under Representation of the People Act, 1951
Constitutional Law Election Law Maintainability of Letters Patent Appeal Appeals Against Interlocutory Orders in Election Petitions Jurisdiction of High Court Under Representation of the People Act, 1951

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Upadhyaya Hargovind Devshanker

Appellant

Dhirendrasinh Virbhadrasinhji Solanki

Respondent No.1

Respondents Nos. 2 to 6

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Hearing Appeal Against Gujarat High Court Division Bench Judgment in Letters Patent Appeal Arising From Election Petition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Letters Patent Appeal lies to a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court from an interlocutory order of a Single Judge in an election petition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951

Ratio Decidendi

An appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent of the High Court does not lie from an interlocutory order of a Single Judge passed in an election petition filed under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Act constitutes a complete code and limits the right of appeal to orders under section 98 or 99, with further appeal only to the Supreme Court under section 116-A. Division Benches of the High Court have no jurisdiction to hear such appeals.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment of the Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court set aside
  • Letters Patent Appeal dismissed