Dismissed

Ramji Sahu v. Sohanlal and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC3 Aug 2011WP/4577/1996

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court considered a petition challenging the legality of an order by the Additional District Judge dismissing a revision against a civil decree. The Court held it had no writ jurisdiction as the order did not involve a grant of discretionary power. Petition dismissed. No stay granted.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed in the writ petition; no stay granted on the impugned order.

Ramji Sahu Vs Sohanlal and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2011)

¶1

MH§G3€' ERER’“;^“FEE u :E“F?‘$. Gf-‘aRu’ L“ "a‘ 3§^L§$Pi§R ’ MWr it Peiitkm f‘éa.é5?? a? i W"a: K} Iamji Sa,m Eio $ahtid Ram $ahu, .}3 aed abeut 53 yers;a R’a \JiageEi G} aiai!un PG. Mahaudbi, P3. &‘ {NewTahGuncéemaM;^3G3} DéstiDurg {MD}" ' I Versus ‘ Raswnae is xma $0han Lei, 3m Kamaiih Jai,n Rita Sdara Bazar: Eam,d TahBamd, m Bisttrg (MP) (Naw as; w Khe‘zma: J,am 5;;‘6 Bhémra} J ain, Rio [V"‘ Sadar 332a, gazed TahBsded, UmLiU.§:}rg {MP} (NW:O CG ) i" 3. he CG i eciar, Eurg {R}M {New O G.) ‘i a {Wr x . etééoni under Amcie 22722? (if the Cnsiitutians o f E nd‘ia) §fAGkJ§§ E Skshi, ccun5e € far th e pe%§iic3n%r.

¶2

‘ Raswnae is

¶3

Mm§iendfa Gupta, counsei far respandems

¶4

“Al!U. "I and 2.

¶5

Mmumiiq Jhanwar, Pane§ La‘ 'yer fer respena‘ent No.”/Sia€a

¶6

$3: Han’bie Mr. Tu?“ SSharma, “in;

‘ ;

mwER gamm(3=a:2m^1}

‘E‘sy

this peiitson undea’ Mime 22? sf *h me Cons%ituticn a? indie fne peig‘tianea’ has chaiienged the iega§iiy and " prepzriet"y uf ihe Order dated 2Q.’i1.95 passed^by the’Bm Additicn'ai Bi$irict Judge; Burg in Case No.4594/§5. r have. perused the Order im§u§ned and a‘rher easemenis fried cn beherf Gr” ihe eeiiréenerr Order rmpugned reveeis met revieion r’éien egernsr ihe Order passed by ihe 8m Civi! Jude Ciaee—ii‘ Burg in Civii Suif Ne.4§-A/‘:Q§5 dared 18.4.’r§§5 was diemiseed by the 8‘“ Addmanei Distrief Judge 0n the ground that vide era‘er dated ’r8.4.1§§5 0M3 Jue‘ge has rejecied the prainr en rhe graund the: s me re barred unrjer ihe iew. ‘v‘érrueny ordereessed by the Ctvtt Judge was under Grater :7 Ftute tt (d) ef the Coe’e of Citvtt Precee‘ure.

¶11

,2,

¶12

¶13

raa$ nei

¶14

Whiie 3uc‘n ()rder the 8m AddiiimQE Disfi'ict Judge pagmirig ng intaference^{inexemisesf3upem$ary}

¶15

cemmkiéd^{aay§$%egaiitywarranti} jurisém‘tion. ‘ii

¶16

Consequen‘iiy, i'n wrii paiticn a3 imbie^tob; ,a'ismissed^and is hemby at éberiy^tuappraaw befar the aweEia‘ze

¶17

dismi$sed, The^gamesaw ‘Ic

¶18

famm.^Noa:deras casts.

¶19

Sd/-
/ TLHSharma
.‘‘‘ Judge

Ramji Sahu v. Sohanlal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramji Sahu v. Sohanlal and Ors.

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

Similar cases

Bhawaneshwar Vs Meghan and Ors.

Sheo Kumar Agrawal Vs the State of M.P. and Ors.

Arvind William Vs State

Ramchand Adwani Vs Bisan Das and Ors.

Victor Christan Vs the State of M.P. and Ors.

Shrawan Kumar Nai Vs Shatrughan and Ors.