PUSHPA DEVI Vs. SAWAN SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short question that falls for consideration in this revision petition is as to whether the order dated 24th December, 1979 striking off the defence of the defendant -respondents No. 3 and 4 herein under order 8 Rule 10. Civil Procedure Code can be reviewed by the trial Court in exercise of inherent power under Section 151 Civil Procedure Code (when the revision petition filed against that order by the defendant -respondent the High Court had been dismissed as with drawn).

(2.) AN order striking off the defence of the defendant when he fails to file his written statement would be an order against which a revision petition is competent as it would be an order by which the right of the defendant to take a defence stood finally determined by the trial Court. The trial Court, even if, a power of review is conceded to it thus could not review that order. Further, even if the defendant had not filed the revision petition in the High Court and the High Court had not dismissed the same as withdrawn, then too order dated 24 -12 -1979 could not have been reviewed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 151 C.P.C. because the said provision could be invoked only if no other provision existed in C.P.C. providing a remedy for the redress of the grievance in question The following observations of their Lordships in Nainsingh v. Koonwarjee : A.I.R. 1970 S.C. 997, can be aptly recalled to mind in this regard: - -

(3.) IN the present case revision was competent against the order dated 24 -12 -1979. Such being the position the trial Court was not comment to exercise jurisdiction under Section 151 C.P.C. in setting aside the said order.