KRISHAN DUTT Vs. MOHINDER NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TWO petitions for review of our judgment dated March 6, 1973, disposing of civil first appeals Nos. 11 and 13 of 1972 were filed by the petitioner on April 24, 1973. On the matter coming up before us on July 10.1973 after service of notice to the other side, it was brought to our notice that the petitions were not in proper form as neither of them was accompanied by a certified copy of the judgment sought to be reviewed or by a certified copy of the decree prepared on the basis thereof. Mr. S. P. Gupta, learned, Counsel for the petitioner, thereupon, submitted that compliance with the provisions of Order 47 Rule 3 read with Order 41 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure was not necessary as there was no decree in favour of any party to the case. He, however, asked for time till July 30, 1973, to support his contention by reference to some decided cases. While making the request for adjournment the learned Counsel assured the court that he would have a certified copy each of the judgment and decree ready before the next date so that he did not have to ask for further adjournment in case his contention did not prevail. He also agreed to argue the point relating to the sufficiency otherwise of the court -fees paid on the memorandums of the petitions on the next date.

(2.) THE case was accordingly directed to be put on July 30, 1973, when a preliminary objection was raised by Mr. J. N. Bhan to the effect that the learned Counsel for the petitioner could not be heard in support of the review petitions as the certificate required to be appended by him to the petitions under Rule IX of Chapter V of the Rules of the Court was not there. Mr. S. P. Gupta, thereupon submitted that the requisite certificate had inadvertently not been appended by him and that he should be given time to rectify the defect. To prevent the ends of justice being defeated we allowed to the learned Counsel a weeks time to rectify the defect on payment of Rs. 25/ - as costs to the other side. On the defect relating to the want of the certificate being rectified and the matter being placed before us for further proceeding we passed a conditional order on December 28, 1973, directing the petitioner to deposit the court fees leviable under Art. 5 of Schedule I of the Court Fees Act and to file a copy each of the judgment and decree within two weeks failing which the memorandum of petitions would stand rejected without further reference to the Bench.

(3.) ALTHOUGH the petitioner deposited the balance of the court fees amounting to Rs. 262.50 within the time allowed to him he failed to file a copy each of the judgment and decree within the time allowed to him vide our order dated December 28, 1973. On the matter being again placed before us on March 25, 1974. we passed the following order in each of the aforesaid two petitions: "The petitioner not having complied with the directions as contained in our order dated December 28, 1973, the petition already stands rejected. Let it, therefore be consigned to records."