INDIRA PATHAK Vs. II ADDL D J ALLD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. B. Mehrotra, J. By means of the present review petition, under Order XLVII, Rule 1, C. P. C. read with the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India the judgment of Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. C. Agrawal, dated 25-11- 1988, as he then was, is sought to be reviewed.

(2.) THE aforesaid application came up before me on 23-10-1990. THE judgment against which the review was being sought, was referred to before a larger Bench by Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. D. Agrawala. In the aforesaid circumstances, I directed that this review petition may also be listed before the Division Bench for decision. A Division Bench of this Court has returned the review petition for decision afresh, observing that the law laid down by Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. C. Agrawal in the writ petition does not lay down the correct law. Since the learned counsel for the opposite party in the petition, namely, Smt. Indra Pathak, who was petitioner in writ petition No. 16968 of 1988 submitted that several other questions in the alternative are involved for consideration in the present review petition, the Division Banch has remitted back the review petition before me.

(3.) IN a Division Bench of this Court, in writ petition No. 4692 of 1984, Ram Prakash v. III Additional District Judge, the correctness of the judgment given by Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. C. Agrawal came for consideration since a contrary view was taken by the learned Single Judge in writ petition No. 4692 of 1984. The Division Bench in the aforesaid judgment, namely, Ram Prakash v. III Additional District Judge, Agra, writ petition No. 4692 of 1984, decided on 18-4-1994 held that the view taken in writ petition No. 16968 of 1988 does not lay down the law correctly. The Division Bench held that it is well settled by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that if a suit is filed within 10 years of the completion of the building, the provisions of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 will not be attracted to such building even though the period of 10 years has lapsed during the pendency of the suit or appeal.