Singh v Sharma [1993] FJCA 1; Abu0012r.90s (1 January 1993)

Fiji Islands - Singh v Sharma - Pacific Law Materials

IN THE FIJI COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 12 OF 1990

BETWEEN:

DEO KARAN SINGH
APPELLANT

AND:

SURYA DEO SHARMA & ANOR
RESPONDENTS

BEFORE THE HON. MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL HELSHAM
PRESIDENT FIJI OF APPEAL
AND BEFORE THE HON. SIR MOTI TIKARAM
RES> RESIDENT JUSTICE OF APPEAL
AND BEFORE THE HON. MR. JUSTICE GORDON WARD
JUSTICE OF APPEAL

Mr. G. P. Shankar for the Appellant
Mr. S. Verma and Mr. H. K. Nagin for the Respondents

Shankar to Court

Note that the Court requires submissions on the four matters listed hereunder and that, so far as the appellant is concerned, the appeal will be determined on the decisions in relation to them.

Direct that the appellant file and serve submissions dealing with them on or before 17th November 1993 and the respondents on or before 1st December.

Matter is stood over for a date for hearing in February 1994 by arrangement with the solicitors for both parties.

It is agreed by both parties that the appeal is not be regarded as being part heard.

Matters for Submissions:

1.Whether or not Dyke J should have proceeded to make an order on 13th February 1987 without a trial on the merits, including a submission that the original notice dated 2nd May 1986 did not comply with the provisions of s.38(1)(b) of the Agricultural Landlord and Tenant Act Cap. 270.

2.Whether or not Dyke J on 13th February 1987 should have proceeded to make an order when the solicitor for the appellant sought leave to withdraw, without the Court having given adequate notification to the appellant.

3.Whether, in all the circumstances, Kersley J, on 28th August 1987, was entitled to set aside the order made by Dyke J on 13th February 1987 when that order had been passed and entered on 20th February 1987.

4.Whether, if Kersley J had jurisdiction to make the order which he purported to make on 28th August 1987, the order made by Sadal J on 19th January 1990 should be read as meaning that the said order of Kersley J be set aside, so that the said order of Dyke J was consequently restored, particularly when the said order by Kersley J had not been passed and entered.

M. M. Helsham
PRESIDENT

Abu0012r.90s