Dismissed

Sri Farooq Beg v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC16 Dec 2021RP/378/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This review petition, filed under CPC Order XLVII Rule 1, challenged a Single Judge's order dismissing a writ petition. The petitioner argued the judgment wrongly relied on another case. The bench found no error apparent on the face and dismissed the review.

What did the court decide?

Review petition under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC dismissed; pending interlocutory application disposed of.

Sri Farooq Beg Vs State of Karnataka — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶7

REVIEW PETITION NO.378/2021 IN

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO.16007/2021(GM-MM-S)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI FAROOQ BEG AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS S/O REHMAN BEG HOLENARASIPURA HASSAN DISTRICT HASSAN - 573 201

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

(BY MS.ANUPARNA BORDOLOI, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶15

REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR

¶16

DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶17

KHANIJA BHAVAN

¶18

RACE COURSE ROAD

¶19

BENGALURU - 560 001

¶20

DEPUTY DIRECTOR

¶21

DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶22

KHANIJA BHAVAN

¶23

RACR COURSE ROAD

¶24

BENGALURU - 560 001

¶25

SENIOR GEOLOGIST (M & J)

¶26

DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY

¶27

HASSAN DISTRICT

¶28

HASSAN - 573 201

¶29

¶30

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICE

¶31

HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201

¶32

TAHSILDAR GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

¶33

HASSAN DISTRICT

¶34

HASSAN - 573 201

¶35

DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST HASSAN SUB-DIVISION HASSAN DISTRICT

¶36

HASSAN - 573 201

¶37

...RESPONDENTS

¶38

(BY SRI S.S.MAHENDRA, AGA)

¶39

¶40

THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE READ WITH ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITTUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 06.09.2021 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NO.16007/2021 (GM-MM-S) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC.

¶41

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM J. MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶42

ORDER

¶43

This review petition is filed seeking review of the order dated 06.09.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.16007/2021.

¶44

Learned counsel for the review petitioner would submit to this Court that the judgment cited by the State in Writ Petition No.9713/2021 is not at all applicable to the case on hand. She would further submit that in fact, the controversy involved in the

¶45

- 3 -

¶46

writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.10601/2019. She submits that the Court has wrongly applied the principles laid in Writ Petition No.9713/2021 and consequently, dismissed the writ petition. She would, therefore, submit that there is an error apparent on the face on account of wrongly placing reliance on the principles laid down by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.9713/2021.

¶47

Heard learned counsel for the review petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

¶48

On perusal of the grounds urged in the review petition, we find that in the review petition, an attempt has been made to seek reopening of the case. The grounds urged in the review petition are meticulously examined. We do not find any error apparent on the face. A futile attempt is made to seek reopening of the case which is not permissible under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

¶49