Law: Letters Patent (Lahore), 1919

Section: 10

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O. XLI, r. 5

  (a) Letters Patent (Lahore), cl. 10 and Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XLI, r. 5-Word "judgment" in cl. 10, Letters Patent (Lahore)-Means `judicial determination or decision of a Court' which may be interlocutory or final-Order vacating status quo gratrted tinder O. XLI, r. 5, C. P. C.-Appealable as "judg ment" tinder c;. 10, Letters Patent (Lahore)-[Mohabir Prosad Singh and others v. Adhikari Kunwar and others I L R 21 Cal. 474 ; Srimarttu Raja Yarlagadda Dunga Prasada Nayadu and another v. Srimantu Raja Yarlagadda Mallikarjuna Prasada Nayadu I L R 24 Mad. 358 and The Justices of the Peace for Calcutta v. The OE icntal Gas Company (1872) 8 B L R 433 overruled]. In an appeal a status duo order was prayed for and granted under Order XLI, rule 5, C.P.C. but this order was subsequently, withdrawn. A Letters Patent Appeal was preferred against this order. On behalf of the respondent objection was raised that an order withdrawing the earlier order of status quo did not determine any right or liability and, therefore, it was not appealable as a "judgment" under clause 10 of the Letters Patent (Lahore). Held : In the general connotation of the term a `judgment' would merely mean a judicial determination or a decision of a Court and it could be interlocutory or final. It is not possible to exclude orders from the term "judgment" used in clause 10, Letters Patent (Lahore) as it is not qualified by any adjective and a wider meaning has to be given to it. The order vacating the status quo granted earlier affects the rights of the parties though temporarily and accordingly the order is appealable as a "judg ment" under clause 10 of the Letters Patent. Mohabir Prosad' Singh and others v. Adhikari Kunwar and others I L R 21. Cal. 474 ; Srimantu Raja Yarlagadda Dunga Prasada Nayadu and another v. Srimantu Raja Yarlagadda Mallikarjuna Prasada Nayadu I L R 24 Mad. 358 and The Justices of the Peace for Calcutta v. The Oriental Gas Company (1872) 28 B L R 433 overruled. Mumtaz Khan v. Chief Settlement Commissioner P L D 1966 S C 276 and Industrial Sales and Service, Karachi and another v. Archifar Opal…