Smt. Shyamkunwar Bai & Ors. v. No.6 to 8 are residents of Kundagaon
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151; O. 47 r. 1
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Considering the aforesaid facts, I do not find any ;round to review the petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed summarily. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge Bini " •6, a
Judgment
Smt. Shyamkunwar Bai & APPLICANTS l'. Sovind Singh, Hitendra Singh. ,2-: Devendra, son of Neerendra SinglC ^-r'Kobendra Singh, Porendra Singh
4. Ajendra Singh, Chatur Singh (^ince dead, ! died on) a"B=s' :: 1'3^'J..^" ..
5."Mahendra Singh, son of Ram ^: ^ • ....•^"A^:'W>-""' ^--^•^^r P-^d. Nos.l to 5 are residents of Narayanpur, District Bastar. 6-i-'Laxmi Bai, widow of Late Amar Singh, aged about 67 years.
7.^Rukmani Bai, Parmanand, aged'. about 46 years. S.^Omprakash, ' Late Parmanand, ayed about 46 years. Vs RESPONDENTS No.6 to 8 are residents of Kundagaon, Tahsil Kundagaon, District Bastar.
Smt. Bela Bai, widow of Late Harendra Singh, aged about 62 years. 2^-Sunil, son of Late l-1arendra Singh, aged about 32 years. Nos.l & 2 are residents of Mahay.ser Chowk, Narayanpur, Tehsil District Narayanpur.
3.^S''tafe M.P. (now Chhattisgarh) tl^rough Collector, Bastar REVIEW PETITION ON THE ANAL06V OF <ORC)ER_47 RULE 1 REA& WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. 1908 & RULE 90 (1) OF THE HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH R(JLES^_2007 ^ IT5J. *%>-i?"';'"^ ^, ^Ss-sss^.^' /\\^? 7£>' HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR SB:- Hon'ble Shri Justice T.P. Sharma Review Petitlon No.179 of 2013 Applicants Respondents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 Govind Singh Devendra Kobendra Singh Ajendra Singh (since dead) Mahendra Singh Laxmi Bai Rukmani Bai Omprakash versus Smt. Bela Bai Sunil State ofrM.P. (now Chhattisgarh) .* Review Petition under on the analogy of Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Rule 90(1) of the High Court of Chhattisgarh of Rules. 2007. Appearance: Shri HS Patel, counsel for the applicants. Shri Parag Kotecha, respondents. counpel 1 ORDER (Passed on 28.11. 2013) By this petition, the applicants have prayed for recalling of Order dated 11.6.2013 passed in Second Appeal No.667 of 2000 on the ground that on the date of passing of order applicant No.6 - Ajendra Singh was not alive i.e. the order was passed against a dead person.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that on the date of passing of order, even he was not. aware that applicant Ajendra Singh was not alive.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents opposes and submits that since the legal representatives of ,^,^''-^—:^. ''u';^-. '• -^KE' ^-\. "Sfe^ '; ~"V:S !: the dead applicant Ajendra Singh have not filed this petition, it is not a fit case for review for recalling the order.
In the present case, Ajendra Singh have not legal representatives of deceased filed this petition, but other appellants who were represented have filed this petition.
Considering the aforesaid facts, I do not find any ;round to review the petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed summarily. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge Bini " •6, a
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.