AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
In none of these cases admittedly is the amount or value of the subject-matter of the suit in the Court of first instance ten thousand rupees or
upwards, nor does the decree in any of these suits directly or indirectly involve some claim of like amount or value. The fact that a common
judgment was pronounced in all the suits and that the aggregate value of all the suits exceeds Rs. 10,000, in our opinion, makes no difference. This
appears to us to be the plain meaning of the section and is in accordance with the ruling of a Full Bench of the Calcutta High Court in Royal
Insurance Co. v. Akhoy Coomar Dutt 6 C.W.N. 41. It is not clear that in Deonarain Singh v. Guni Singh 34 C.K 400 the leave granted was u/s
596 corresponding to Section 110, and not u/s 595(c) corresponding to Section 109(c). As to Raja Jagaveera, Rama Venkateswara v.
Suppanasarri 22 Ind. Cas. 290 : (1914) M.W.N. 162 the case referred to by the learned JuJges does not support their conclusion. We hold,
therefore, that the applicants are not entitled to a certificate u/s 110.
As regards Section 109(c) we are not satisfied that there is a fit case for appeal to His Majesty in Council.
The decision seems to be in accordance with the plain language of the Act and with numerous decisions of this Court.
These petitions are dismissed with costs.