The High Court dismissed a civil revision. The court held the revision was devoid of merit because the applicant failed to challenge the lower court's exemption from court fees below. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
Nulla, the revision was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) o;.
o;.
CIVIL REVISION N0. l^
/ 2006
APPLICANT
©EFN0. 3 ^f
fct'^'
^%^"i
-w
^•y
^-
.Chhagan son of Shri Ishwar Singh Madharia, aged about 34 resident of Near Radha years, Kishan Mandir, Bhilai - III, P.S. Bhilai - III, Sub Tahsil Bhilai - III, Distt. Durg (C.G.)
VERSUS
NQN-APPLICANTS ,/"" 43LAINTIFFS
Smt. Indu Patel, widow of Late Ravi Patel, aged about 25 years,
Sanket aged about 2 years (Minor), son of Late Ravi Patel
Ku. Bhumika daughter of Late Ravi Patel, aged about 3 months
(rainor)
81.No. 2 to 3 are the minors, through their natural guardian mother Smt. Indu Patel, widow of Late Ravi Patel.
^"
Shamkunwar, aged about 55 years, wife of Shri Lakhan Lal Patel,
All are resident of Shikshak Nagar, Nutan Chowk - Bhilai -3, Sub Tahsil Bhilai, P.S. Bhilai - 3, Distt. Durg (C.G.)
RESPONDENTS DEFENDANTS
Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board, through - Its Chairman, C.S.E.B. Danganiya, Raipur, Tah
and Distt. Raipur (C.G.)
l^.
State of Chhattisgarh, through - the Disti-ict Collector, Distt. Durg
(Chhattisgarh)
./'-""
CIVIL REVISION UNDER SECTION 115 OF THE CIVIL
PROCEDURE CODE, 1908
XI-HC-78
v5-ac| ^Nicn^, ^Tfl<M^<o, fctcrti^y
+11^<<11 9h^ll^
C: ^. r^- ^ ^ 200^
3:n^T cra^? (<{c( i^cj <^£T)
| ^T cT§ |
^T^rf^Tf^ TT3TT^T$h^ich |
^Rn'^K^rficr^TT^r | chl^f<yl41^ HTR^ff^tel^l'<i^«l< ^3Tf^T3TI^T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03/01/2007 | |||
| Shri N.S. Dhurandhar, cour |
|||
| •^ | Heard cn admisslon, By order dated 27.9.200^ Additionai Distria: Judge (F.T.C.), |
||
| piaintlffwas exempted from the Court Fee Act on the basis of the piaintiff did not possess propert1/. payrrj a |
|||
| Shri N.S. Dhurandhar, conceded that after receipt of t |
appllcant herein did not. raise an^j did not pray for any opporturt ofthe matter, the impugned ordeij of Court Fee on the basis ofthe r |
||
| €1; | This revision beingdevoid | Consequently, M.(C.).P. ^, dlsrnissed. |
|
| Kvr | C.C. as per rules | Sd/- DilipRaosahebDeshmukh Judge |
P.T.O.
<&
c^
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the revision is maintainable when the applicant did not object below or seek leave to adduce evidence.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Chhagan
Smt. Indu Patel
Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
