Law:

Section:

Where the question for consideration was whether a stranger to a suit or proceeding can file an appeal if he is adversely affected by an order in that suit or proceeding:Held, a stranger, to a suit or a proceeding is not prohibited by the Code of Civil Procedure from filing an appeal from an order passed therein. It is true that there is no express provi­sion permitting such party to prefer an appeal against such an order. This omission, however, cannot be understood to amount to prohibition. The Court ought not to act on the principle that every procedure is to be taken as prohibited unless it is expressly provided for. To give such a meaning to the omission would result in grave injustice. The Court should proceed on the principle that every procedure which furthers administration of justice is permissible even if there is no express provision permitting the same. Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code deals with appeals from decrees and section 104 deals with appeals from orders. These provisions do not in terms say who is entitled to prefer an appeal. The Code, however, lays down that it is the decree or the order that has to be appealed against. If the decree or order appealed from adversely affects a person he should be permitted to challenge the same in appeal even if he was not made a party to the original suit or proceeding. The English Courts have consistently followed the practice that a person who is not a party to a suit or a proceed­ing may prefer an appeal if he is affected by the , decree or order of the trial Court provided he obtains leave from the Court of appeal. The test applied in granting leave to appeal, in such cases is that it the person who wants to prefer the appeal might properly save been a party in the suit or proceeding then he may obtain leave to appeal. Sm. K. Pannalagu 4mmal v. Tire State of Madras and others A I R 1953 Mad. 485 and In re: B. An Infant (1958) 1 Q B 12 ref. J. Rustatnji of Lahore v. Official Liquidator of the People's and Amritsar Bank Ltd. and another A I R 1919 Lah. 180; Indian Bank Ltd., Madras v. Saith 8wrsiram Jashamal (Firm) and another A 1 R 1934 Mad. 360 and Al-Kisan Transport Co., Ltd. v. Regional…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492