Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed a review petition filed to challenge a second appeal judgment on succession and eviction. The court held review proceedings are not appeals and cannot be used to argue the case afresh.
Review petition dismissed as having no substratum and being tenable as a substitute for appeal.
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.
1
REVP No. 252 of 2019
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
REVP No. 252 of 2019
---- Petitioners
Versus
2
REVP No. 252 of 2019
---- Respondents
Application for review of the order dated 14.11.2019 passed in SA No. 782 of 1998
By Circulation in Chamber
S.B.: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
13/02/2020
3
REVP No. 252 of 2019
the Courts below are perverse in the absence of pleading and proof thereof. According to the petitioners, the said Will and heir-ship of Rajendra Shankar Shukla not having been pleaded and proved the eviction suit between landlord and tenant has abated on death of Late Brijrani Bai.
4
REVP No. 252 of 2019
on merits under the garb of the review petition, which is not permissible and tenable in law.
SD/( Prashant Kumar Mishra ) Judge
Ayushi
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a review petition can be used to argue the entire case afresh instead of being strictly confined to Order 47 Rule 1 CPC.
Whether the review petition has any substratum given the absence of evidence for heirship claims.
Whether admitting a second appeal on a point not framed as a question of law is revisitable via review.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Meera Bhanjan v. Smt. Nirmal Kumar ChowdharyReferred¶37
Meera Bhanjan v. Smt. Nirmal Kumar Chowdhary, AIR 1995 SC 455 · Who else cites this
Lily Thomas v. Union of IndiaReferred¶37
Lily Thomas etc. v. Union of India and others, AIR 2000 SC 1650 · Who else cites this
Ajit Kumar Rath v. State of OrissaReferred¶37
Ajit Kumar Rath v. State of Orissa and others, AIR 2000 SC 85 · Who else cites this
Government of T.N. v. M. Ananchu AsariReferred¶37
Government of T.N. & Others v. M. Ananchu Asari and others, (2005) 2 SCC 332 · Who else cites this
Kerala State Electricity Board v. Hitech ElectrothermicsReferred¶37
Kerala State Electricity Board v. Hitech Electrothermicsm & Hydropower Ltd. and others, (2005) 6 SCC 651 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kanti Mishra
Sameer Mishra
Durgesh Mishra
Seema Shukla
Rajendra Shankar Shukla
Prashant Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
