Aggrieved against the order of learned single Judge of Bombay High Court dated 26 4 88, the appellants before us, filed a Letters Patent Appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court.
The Full Bench by order dated 18 7 1989 in Sushilabai Laxmi narayan Mudaliyar v. Nihalchand Waghajibhai Shah, 1989 Mah LJ 695, after dealing with the question referred, sent the case back to the Division Bench for deciding the question of the maintainability of the Letters Patent Appeal.
The Full Bench referred to decisions of this Court in Umaji Kesho Meshram v. Radhikabai w o Anand Rao Banapurkar and an unreported Judgment of this Court in Civil Appeal No.
Even when the learned single Judges order has been passed under both the Articles, for deciding the maintainability against such an order what would be the relevant is the principal or main relief granted by the judgment passed by learned single Judge and number the ancillary directions given by him.
The Clause 15 of the Letters Patent expressly base appeals against orders of single Judges passed under revisional or supervisory powers.
The Division Bench referred the matter to a Full Bench.
Both these appeals can be disposed of on a short ground.
