High CourtsDivision Bench(1927) 05 MAD CK 0007

(Vaddiraju) Venkata Jagga Rao vs Pitta Ranganayakulu

Madras High Court · Decided on 5 May 1927 · Citation: AIR 1928 Mad 48

HON’BLE JUDGES
Phillips, J

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

9 paragraphs · 216 words

Phillips, J.—The petitioner seeks to revise an order passed by the Agent to the Governor at Vizagapatam setting aside the dismissal of a suit

for default and ordering its restoration to file. It is here contended that the power under Agency E. 55, given to the Agent to the Governor, can

only be exercised if he is satisfied that the order of the lower Court is not according to law. It is significant that the Agency rules do not provide for

any appeal against an order refusing to set aside a dismissal. Therefore the exercise of discretion by the first Court becomes final and is not subject

to alteration by the appellate Court. If the Agent to the Governor was satisfied that this discretion had not been properly exercised by the first

Court he would be justified in acting under Rule 55. In the present case, on the merits, his order is certainly rights for I am of opinion that the

Special Assistant Agent omitted to take into consideration many circumstances which might probably have induced him to reconsider his order. If,

therefore, the. Governor''s Agent thought that the Assistant Agent had not exercised his discretion judicially, as he evidently did, he was justified in

taking action under Rule 55. The petition is dismissed with costs.