Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 3275 (PNJ)

Shrawan Sadhuji Gorle and etc. v. Vasantrao Santoshrao Jagtap

2006-08-10

R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR, S.R.DANGAONKAR

body2006
JUDGMENT R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J. - Evidently, therefore, even though the orders may be of interim or interlocutory nature, if it concludes any dispute or subject or question or issue, either in the controversy in the main case, or even a collateral one, in the sense that it finally determines the said dispute, subject matter, question or issue, during the pendency or disposal of the suit of the case or proceedings, affecting the vital and valuable right and obligation of the parties, it would amount to a judgment within the meaning of the said word in Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. However, in the absence of such final determination merely because such order causes some inconvenience or prejudice to a party and to that extent it may appear to have dealt with the rights and liabilities of the parties, without finally determining any vital and valuable right or obligation, it would not be a judgment within the meaning of the said expression under clause 15 of the Letters Patent. Order accordingly.