REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

SAILO RAM Appellant

V/S

KULDIP CHAND Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH V. SITA RAM [REFERRED TO]
SOHAN SINGH AND COMPANY V. MOHAMMAD AISHAK TYAGI [REFERRED TO]
BALWANT SINGH V. BISHAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
SHER SINGH V. KASHMIRI LAL CHAMAN LAL SARAF [REFERRED TO]
VIDYA SAGAR SOOD V. AMAR CHAND [REFERRED TO]
PARMESHWARI DEVI V. MOHINDER KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
BUDDHULAL V. MEWA RAM [REFERRED TO]
KULWANT SINGH V. OM PRAKASH SUD [REFERRED TO]
SARWAN KUMAR V. RAVINDER KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
KUNJI DEVI V. CHAMAN LAL [OVERULLED .) 2,20,30,34]
POSHU RAM V. CHOBE RAM,1999 CIVIL REVN. NO. 187 OF 1999 [REFERRED TO]
PARVEEN KUMAR V. PREM CHAND [REFERRED TO]
MINA RAM V. AMLOK RAM [REFERRED TO]
MAJOR S S KHANNA IN BOTH THE APPEALS VS. BRIG F J DILLON IN BOTH THE APPEALS [REFERRED TO]
BALDEV DAS SHIVLAL VS. FILMISTAN DISTRIBUTORS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. K S SUBRAMANIAN [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. TITAGHVR PAPER MILLS COMPANY LTD:MANGALJI MULJI KHARA [REFERRED TO]
GURDEV SINGH VS. MEHNGA RAM [REFERRED TO]
JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. KAILASHWATI DEVI [REFERRED TO]
KADIYALA RAMA RAO VS. GUTALA KAHNA RAO [REFERRED TO]
MAHAVIR SINGH VS. NARESH CHANDRAS [REFERRED TO]
SALEM ADVOCATE BAR ASSOCIATION TAMIL NADU VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
RAM DASS VS. SUBHASH BAKSHI [REFERRED TO]
SATINDER SINGH VS. SUKHDEV [REFERRED TO]
RYOTS OF GARABANDHO VS. ZEMINDAR OF PARLAKIMEDI [REFERRED TO]
BALAKRISHNA UDAYAR VS. VASUDEVA AIYAR [REFERRED TO]
DEVI RAM VS. MURLI [REFERRED TO]
STATE V. KRISHHU MAL [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two sets of references which have been ordered to be listed together.

(2.) While Civil Revision Petition No. 158 of 2001 was being heard, it transpired that an application under Order XVIII, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for recall of plaintiff was filed by the petitioner in this case which was declined. At the time of hearing of this revision, reference was made by learned counsel for the parties to two decisions of this Court in case Poshu Ram v. Chobe Ram. Civil Revision No. 187 of 1999, Kunji Devi v. Chaman Lal, Civil Revision No. 389 of 1999. In both these decisions, it was held that revision against order passed under Order XVIII, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure being not the "case decided", as such was not maintainable. Reliance was placed on decisions of the Punjab and Haryana High Court as such both revisions were rejected. There were decisions of this Court to the contrary, i.e. State of Himachal Pradesh v. Shri Sita Ram, 1972 SLJ HP 131; Kulwant Singh v. Om Prakash Sud, 1998 (1) SLJ 290; Satinder Singh v. Sukhdev, 1999 (3) Shim LC 457 : (AIR 1999 Him Pra 72) and Sarwan Kumar v. Ravinder Kumar, 2000 (1) Shim LC 373. In these circumstances, following order was passed :-

(3.) Civil Revision Nos. 333 of 2001, 354 of 2001, 1 of 2002 and 235 of 2002, all arise from orders on applications filed in the respective cases under Order XVIII, Rule 17-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. Civil Revision No. 158 of 2001 arises out of an order passed on an application under Order XVIII, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Click here to view full judgment.

SAILO RAM Vs. KULDIP CHAND

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address