Sesha Ayyar And Another (S Nos. 2 And 3), v. Nagarathna Lala (), Counter-Petitioner.

In my opinion the respondent in a Letters Patent appeal preferred against the decision of a single Judge of this Court in a mufussil case cannot apply for security being demanded from the appellant for costs. Section 549 of the Civil Procedure Code applies only to appeals preferred to the High Court from subordinate Courts subject to its appellate jurisdiction [Sabhapathy Chetti v. Narayanasami Chetti ] and not to appeals preferred to the High Court under article 15 of the Letters Patent from the judgment of one of its own Judges. Assuming that it would be competent to the High Court to pass such a rule, no rule has been made under section 652 of the Civil Procedure Code authorizing the malting of such an application. It is also conceded that no such rule was in force in the old Sudder Court, and that being so section 9 of the Charter Act cannot be relied upon in support of this application. I am unable to accede to the Argument that section 647 of the Civil Procedure Code applies to Letters Patent appeals and that therefore the provisions of section 549 are extended to Letters Patent appeals. The petition is therefore rejected but without costs.