- (1.) The instant first miscellaneous appeal has been filed by the appellant by challenging an order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 27th November, 2013 by rejecting the appellant's application for recalling of an order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 6th July, 2002 by which the revisional application filed by the appellant challenging an order passed by the learned trial Judge on 29th May, 1999 in Misc. Case No. 44 of 1987, was dismissed. Maintainability of such an appeal before this Court is questioned by Mr. Roy, Learned Advocate, appearing for the respondent. According to him there is no provision either in the Civil Procedure Code or under the Appellate Side Rules which provides for an appeal before the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court for challenging the legality of any order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in connection with the revisional application. Though the appellant appearing in person contended before us that such an appeal is maintainable before this Court but he failed to cite any provision of law under which such a miscellaneous appeal can be maintained before this Court.
(2.) Clause 15 of the Letters Patent (1865) is the only provision which provides for intra Court appeal. The said provision runs as follows:- "15. Appeal from the Courts of original jurisdiction to the High Court in the Appellate jurisdiction- And we do further ordain, that an appeal shall lie to the said High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal from the judgment (not being a judgment passed in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction in respect of a decree or order made in the superintendence of the said High Court, and not being a sentence or order passed or made in the exercise of the power of superintendence under the provisions of Section 107 of the Government of India Act or in the exercise of criminal jurisdiction) of one Judge of the said High Court or Government of India Act, and that notwithstanding anything hereinbefore provided no appeal shall lie to the said High Court from a judgment of one judge of the said High Court or one judge of any Division Court, pursuant to Section 108 of the Government of India Act made on or after the first day of February One thousand nine hundred and twenty nine in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction by a Court subject to the superintendence of the said High Court, where the judge who passed the judgment declares that the case is as fit one for one appeal, but that the right of appeal from other judgments of Judges of the said High Court or of such Division Court shall be to Us, Our heirs or successors in Our or Their Privy Council as hereinafter provided".
(3.) The said provision thus, makes it clear that any order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction cannot be assailed in appeal before the Division Bench of this Court. The Court while dealing with a revisional application in its Appellate Side Jurisdiction, does not discharge its function relating to Original Jurisdiction of this Court. As such, no appeal can be filed before the Division Bench of this Court for challenging the legality of any order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in its revisional jurisdiction. There is no provision either in the Civil Procedure Code or in the Appellate Side rules which provides for such appeal before the Division Bench of this Court for challenging the legality of any order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in its Civil revisional jurisdiction. Accordingly we hold that the appeal is not maintainable.;