Dulari Devi v. Devki Devi @ Debaki Devi
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 O. XLVII r. 1
Judgment
#1. Devki Devi @ Debaki Devi W/O Sri Laxman Mahto R/O Village- Khajuraha, P.S.- Sonbarsa, District- Saharsa …………….. Writ petitioner / ……………………………....Appellant …………... Opposite Party 1st set.
#2. The State of Bihar
#3. The State Election Commission, Bihar, Patna through its Commissioner
#4. The Commissioner, State Election Commission, Bihar, Patna
#5. The District Magistrate, District Election Officer (Panchayat), Saharsa
#6. The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Saharsa
#7. The Block Development Officer, Sonbarsa, Saharsa .... .... Respondents / Opposite Party IInd set. ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Baidyanath Prasad, Advocate. For the Respondents-State: Mr. Sandip Singh, AC to GP 9. For the Respondent no.3 & 4: Mr. Amit Shrivastava and Mr. Girish Pandey, Advocates. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 6 02-08-2013 This application for review under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed by the respondent no. 7 for review of our order dated 14th March 2013 made on LPA no. 1841 of 2012. Patna High Court C. REV. No.126 of 2013 (6) dt.02-08-2013 The review seems to have been sought on the basis of some order made by the revenue authorities in a proceeding before the Survey and Settlement Officer. No ground for review is made out. Review petition is summarily rejected. (R.M. Doshit, CJ) Dilip. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — O. XLVII r. 1.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Patna High Court, on 14 Mar 2013. The bench was AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.