The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226 challenging an order dismissing a review petition. The court found no grounds for interference as the underlying judgment had attained finality due to the death of a co-appellant and the ten-year limitation bar on review.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
O R D E R
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8411/2016 (Hargovind
v.
Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer & Ors.) Date of Order:07/09/2016
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
Mr. Bhanu Pareek, for the petitioner.
Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that the impugned order dated 24.3.2015 passed by the Board of Revenue be set aside.
In the present case, Ramjilal co-appellant of the petitioner, had died on 10.10.1991. Application was filed on 27.2.1992 for bringing on record legal representatives of Ramjilal. On 28.10.1993 the appeal was dismissed qua Ramjilal having abated. After thirteen years petitioner filed an application for review. The Board of Revenue dismissed the review petition and held that the impugned judgment was passed by the Board of Revenue on 28.10.1993. Ramjilal and the petitioner were co-appellant. Both were represented by Bhawani Singh, Advocate. It was not disputed that the appeal preferred by the petitioner was decided on merits. Hence, Board of Revenue, while dismissing the review held that only legal representatives of Ramjilal could come forward to file an application seeking review. Furthermore, it has been rightly held by the Board of Revenue that after twenty years review petition cannot be
entertained as the judgment had attained finality. Having perused the impugned order passed by the Board of Revenue, this court is of the view that no ground is made to cause interference.
Hence, present petition being devoid of merit is dismissed.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J.
Govind/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Board of Revenue's order dismissing the petitioner's review petition due to abatement and limitation.
Whether the present writ petition has sufficient merit to warrant the interference of this court.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Hargovind
Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer
Kanwalsingh Ahluwalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
