- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties on the question of maintainability of this L.P.A.
(2.) This L.P.A. is against the order dated 03.03.2011 passed in Appeal Case (S.B.) No.11 of 2010, hence, the respondents have raised objection about the maintainability of this further appeal before the same High Court on the ground that no L.P.A. lies against the order passed by the High Court while exercising appellate jurisdiction. Learned counsel for the respondents have relied upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of Geeta Devi and others Vrs. Puran Ram Raigar and another, 2010 9 SCC 84. In the said judgment, it has been held that after insertion of Section 100-A, intra Court appeal in a High Court is not maintainable notwithstanding anything in the High Court Rules or Letters Patent to the contrary.
(3.) Learned-counsel for the appellant submitted that a Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 141 of 2010 relying upon a judgment in the case of Sachida Nand Lal @ Sachida Nand Shah Vrs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand), 2009 1 JCR 120 held that intra Court appeal is maintainable. Learned counsel for the appellant also relied upon the said judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of Sachida Nand Lal @ Sachida Nand Shah.;