Privy Council(1920) 12 PRI CK 0002

Maharaj Bahadur Singh vs Balchand Chowdhury and others

Privy Council · Decided on 10 December 1920 · Citation: (1921) AIR(PC) 128

HON’BLE JUDGES
Lawrence Jenkins, Ameer Ali, Phillimore, Buckmaster, JJ.

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 206 words

Lord Buckmaster

Their Lordships are not satisfied in this case as to the form in which the certificate for leave to appeal is framed. It is alleged to be based on two different grounds; the one is a question of fact as to amount and the other a question of opinion, as to whether or not discretion should be exercised. So far as relates to the question of fact it appears to be faulty, for the amount in dispute is not sufficient. So far as it relates to a question of opinion the matter is not made plain, as it ought to be upon the certificate that the discretion was invoked and the discretion was exercised. Their Lordships will say no more about the certificate except again to point out that they think it of the utmost importance that these certificates, when it is suggested that they are made in exercise of the discretion conferred, should make plain upon their face that the discretion has in fact been exercised. For the rest, they think that the special circumstances of this case enable them to advise His Majesty that special leave to appeal should be granted, but of course a petition must be lodged for that purpose