VIRENDER PARKASH Vs. RIKHI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the order dated 6th April, 2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. 2, Kangra, whereby she dismissed the suit filed by the Plaintiff as having abated.

(2.) MS . Charu Gupta, learned Counsel appearing for Respondents No. 2, 5, 7 and 10 to 14 has raised preliminary objections that the petition is not maintainable since the Petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 (k) of the Code of Civil Procedure. Her second objection is that the petition is highly belated.

(3.) IN Vadivelu 'scase, the Apex Court dealing with the powers of superintendence vested in the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India held that when there is an error of jurisdiction or flagrant violation of law laid down by the Apex Court, the High Court in its revisional powers can set aside the order passed by the Tribunal. The Apex Court did not deal with the issue of efficacious alternative remedy and the scope and ambit of Article 227 of the Constitution.