Allowed

Ram Karan and Another v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Sultanpur and Others

Allahabad HC8 May 2024CMRA/63/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Review application allowed to correct an inadvertent error where the Court had quashed the appellate order, leaving the revisional authority with nothing to adjudicate. The portion of the prior judgment quashing the appellate order was deleted.

What did the court decide?

Part of the judgment dated 05.04.2024 quashing the appellate order deleted.

Ram Karan and Another vs Deputy Director of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:37285

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION No. - 63 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ram Karan And Another Opposite Party :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation, Sultanpur And Others

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Shishir Yadav

¶6

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶7

The present review application has been preferred for review of the judgment/order dated 05.04.2024 passed in Writ B No. 228 of 2024 (Vasudev and Anr. vs. D.D.C. Sultanpur and 3 Ors.) by the respondent nos. 3 & 4 in the said writ petition.

¶8

Learned counsel for the review applicant/respondent nos. 3 & 4 has submitted that the appellate order passed by Settlement Officer, Consolidation is not required to be quashed while remanding the matter to the revisional authority to decide the revision on merits as the revision was preferred against the appellate order dated 28.04.2023 passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation, otherwise what the revisional court would decide once the appellate order has already been quashed by this Court.

¶9

On the other hand, Sri Balram Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner/respondent in the present review petition has submitted that due to some inadvertence, the appellate order was challenged in the writ petition and agreeing with the submission made by learned counsel for the review applicant and has further submitted that in the revision, the validity of the appellate order dated 28.04.2023 is to be seen but it has been quashed by this Court then nothing remains with the revisional authority to adjudicate upon so, the review application may be allowed to the said extent by reviewing the order as argued and admitted between the parties.

¶10

After hearing learned counsel for both the parties as both the parties are agreeing that the order dated 05.04.2024 may be reviewed to the extent that the appellate order dated 28.04.2023 which was quashed by this Court is to be deleted from the judgement dated 05.04.2024 as such the judgment/order dated 05.04.2024 is reviewed to the extent that part of the order dated 05.04.2024 in the writ petition is deleted as far it is related to quashing of appellate order dated 28.04.2023 passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation.

¶11

In view of the above, the review petition is allowed.

¶12

Order Date :- 15.5.2024 Nitesh

¶13

Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Karan and Another v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Sultanpur and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Karan and Another v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Sultanpur and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bashisth Muni and Others Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Faizabad and Others

Mohd. Jama Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and Others

Jai Karan Singh and Others Vs Asstt. Director Consolidation Sultanpur and Others

Smt. Dev Raji and Others Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Sultanpur and Others

Smt. Bitto Devi Vs the Board of Revenue through Its Chairman U.P. Lko.

Shiv Baran Vs Up Zila Adhikari Lal Ganj, Raebareli and Others