TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1919 (7) TMI 3
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ami Aiyar for the appellant in A. A. O. No. 170 of 1918. The lower appellate Court remanded each of the appeals for retrial and appeals purporting to be under Order 43 Rule 1(u) have been preferred to this Court. It was held in A. A. O. No. 243 of 1918 that where the order of remand was made not on a preliminary point, no appeal lies against it. Mr. A. Krishnaswami Aiyar conceded that if an order ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....egislature contemplated the exercise of powers Ex debiti Justitia which were not specifically conferred by the rules. This is the view taken by a strong Bench of the Calcutta High Court consisting of five Judges Ghuznavi v. The Allahabad Bank Ltd. I.L.R. (1917) Cal. 929. The same view was taken in Jambullayya v. Rajamma I.L.R. (1912) Mad. 492 and Kuppalan v. Kunjavalli (1913) 9 M.L.T. 373. We see ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iginal contention is sound. Rightly or wrongly for some years, courts in this Presidency have been informed by the High Court that they have an inherent power of remand. Vide Ramchandra Joshi v. Hazi Kasim I.L.R. (1892) Mad 207, Kuppalan v. Kunjavalli (1911) 9 M.L.T. 373 and Jambulayya v. Rajamma I.L.R. (1892) Mad. 492 : 24 M.L.J. 412 . There is no reason for imputing to the lower courts ignorance....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sition. It is a piece of evidence, the admissibility of which was decided by the appellate Court in a particular manner. It cannot be said that this point is collateral to the merits of the case. 6. In the next appeal No. 272 of 1919, there is much to be said in favour of Mr. K.V. Krishnaswami Aiyars argument that the remand was wholly unnecessary. If we were hearing the appeal, we would not have....