MANJU TANEJA Vs. L.S. PAWAR & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present petition filed under Sec. 115 of the Civil P.C. read with Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 24.01.2017 by which an application filed under Sec. 114 read with Order 47 Civil P.C. seeking review of judgment dated 14.07.2016 was dismissed.

(2.) The grounds taken in the review application were that the counsel appearing for the petitioner has made a concession to the court and has confined his argument to the issue of damage/mesne profits and did not challenge the finding of the trial court regarding the other reliefs. It is submitted that the petitioner had never authorised her counsel to challenge the decree of the trial court dated 04.03.2015 only limited to the issue of quantum of damage/mesne profits.

(3.) The respondents filed a suit for permanent injunction, possession and damages. It was claimed in the plaint that the respondent/plaintiff is the absolute owner of the property at Kalkaji and had purchased the said property from the previous owner on 08.06.2005 vide sale documents duly registered with the Sub-Registrar. The contention was that the petitioner has unauthorisedly entered into the suit property.