OM PARKASH Vs. NOTAN DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Om Parkash has filed the present revision and it has been directed against the order dated 31.10.1998 passed by the Sub-Judge, Jr. Division, Sonepat, who dismissed the application of the defendant-petitioner for review of the order dated 11.10.1996.

(2.) Some facts can be noticed in the following manner for the disposal of this revision:-

(3.) I have heard the counsel for the parties and am of the considered opinion that the present revision is not legally maintainable. The order dated 11.10.1996 could be challenged by way of revision and not by way of review application under Order 47, C.P.C. The Courts are competent to pass wrong or legal orders but so- long the same are within the domain of the Court, such orders can only be challenged by way of appeal/revision. This Court, of course, feels that the order dated 11.10.1996 could not and should not have been passed by the Civil Judge in view of the order dated 15.4.1994 because a relief which has been declined to the plaintiff in the order dated 15.4.1994 should not have been allowed in the order dated 11.10.1996. Even the order dated 15.4.1994 was subject to revision which has not been filed by the plaintiff. Be that as it may, the order dated 11.10.1996 was passed by a Court of competent jurisdiction though may not be according to law. Such order could only be disturbed by way of revision and not by review as the scope of review under Order 47 Rule 1 C.P.C. is limited, which lays down as follows:-