ORDER : 1. This is an application under Art. 132(1), Constitution of India for a certificate that the case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution. 2. The applicant was a deft. in the case filed by the plff. for the pre-emption of a house said to have been sold by him to a stranger. The case was heard by a single Judge of the Bhopal High Court who dismissed the suit. An appeal was preferred against this judgment and a Division Bench of the Bhopal High Court decreed it on 5-1-1950. This decree was final as His Highness the Ruler of Bhopal had abolished the Judicial Council of the State by means of a notification dated 14-4-1949. 3. The applicant has set forth in the grounds of his application that Bhopal State Pre-emption Act, 1934, is inconsistent with and in derogation of the Fundamental Right conferred by the Constitution under Art. 19(f), that all the parties to the suit are Hindus amongst whom neither the law of Pre-emption nor Custom to that effect is observed and that the matter involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution. 4. The main question to be decided is whether an appeal could lie against the judgment or decree of the Bhopal High Court to the Supreme Court and the decision of this question hinges on whether the High Court of Bhopal was a High Court within the meaning of Art. 132(1) of the Constitution. 5. The learned counsel on behalf of the applicant has urged that the Federal Court Act, 1937, having been applied to the Chief Commissioner's province of Bhopal on 1-1-1950, the judgments and decrees of the Bhopal High Court were rendered appealable to the aforesaid Court and by virtue of S. 205, Govt. of India Act, 1935, but this argument does not take into account the fact that the aforesaid section in reality envisages a High Court as defined in S. 219 of the said Act and the Bhopal High Court is not included in the High Courts specified in that Section. 6. of India Act, 1935, but this argument does not take into account the fact that the aforesaid section in reality envisages a High Court as defined in S. 219 of the said Act and the Bhopal High Court is not included in the High Courts specified in that Section. 6. So far as the Constitution of India is concerned the definition of "High Court" as given in Art. 366(14) is as follows : "High Court means any Court which is deemed for the purposes of this Constitution to be a High Court for any State and includes:- (a) any Court in the territory of India constituted or reconstituted under this Constitution as a High Court. (b) any other Court in the territory of India which may be declared by Parliament by law to be High Court for all or any of the purposes of this Constitution." 7. The Bhopal High Court continued to owe its existence under the Charter granted to it by the ex-Ruler of Bhopal and it was on 25-1-1950, that the Judicial Commissioner's Court was established in its place. The mere fact that the Federal Court Act was applied to the Chief Commissioner's province of Bhopal does not take away the effect of the Charter of the Bhopal High Court or change its constitution nor does the Constitution of India confer upon it the status of a High Court as defined in Art. 366 quoted above because the aforesaid Court was not constituted or reconstituted as a High Court under the Constitution nor declared by Parliament to be such for any purpose of the Constitution. 8. The rules of the Supreme Court of India do exclude such Courts as Bhopal High Court from the definition of a High Court in respect of every thing either done before or after the commencement of the Constitution. "High Court" as defined in the aforesaid rules, means - "(1) As respects anything done before the commencement of the Constitution a High Court within the meaning of S. 219, Govt. of India Act, 1935, and (2) As respects anything done or to be done after the commencement of the Constitution, a High Court established by or recognised under the Constitution." 9. of India Act, 1935, and (2) As respects anything done or to be done after the commencement of the Constitution, a High Court established by or recognised under the Constitution." 9. This will clearly show that the High Court of Bhopal has no place in the list of such Courts and has not been recognised to be one such even by the Supreme Court. It therefore necessarily follows that no judgment or order of the Bhopal High Court is appealable to the Supreme Court as a consequence of which the application stands dismissed with costs.