Petitioner filed a civil revision regarding a service dispute. The High Court examined the status of the original proceeding, found it had been disposed of via an ex-parte decision, and held the revision inadmissible as the underlying case no longer exists.
The revision petition was dismissed as the main proceeding was concluded ex-parte.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 143/2017
Kishan Murari S/o Late Chimman Lal, R/o 91, Jain Dharmshala, Purani Anaj Mandi, Town Deeg, Tehsil Deeg, District Bharatpur Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
Smt. Asha Devi W/o Kishan Murari D/o Madan Lal, By Caste Vaishya, R/o Jain Dharmshala, Purani Anaj Mandi, Town Deeg, Tehsil Deeg, District Bharatpur Raj. At Present Prem Nagar, Nagloi, Delhi
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anshul Sharma For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA
Order
11/10/2023
;g nhokuh iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk fo}ku U;k;ky; vij ftyk ,oa ls'ku U;k;k/kh'k la[;k&1 Mhx ftyk Hkjriqj ds fofo/k nhokuh izdj.k la[;k 04@2016 Jherh vk'kk nsoh&cuke&fd'ku eqjkjh izkFkZuk&i= varxZr vkns'k 9 fu;e 13 flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk ¼vUrxZr /kkjk 13 fgUnw fookg vf/kfu;e 1956 muokuh fd'ku eqjkjh&cuke&Jherh vk'kk nsoh ceqdnek uacj 91@2015 rkjh[k QSlyk 15-07-2015½ esa ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 08-06-2017] ftlds }kjk izkFkZuk&i= Lohdkj fd;k tkdj fnukad 06-02-2015 dks ikfjr ,di{kh; dk;Zokgh ds vkns'k ,oa fnukad 15-07-2015 dks ikfjr ,di{kh; fu.kZ; o fMØh dks vikLr djrs gq, ewy ;kfpdk fofo/k nhokuh la[;k 91@2015 fd'ku eqjkjh&cuke&Jherh vk'kk nsoh dks iqu% iwoZ uacj ij ntZ fd, tkus dk vkns'k fn;k x;k] ls O;fFkr gksdj foi{kh@fuxjkdkj fd'ku eqjkjh dh vksj ls izLrqr dh xbZ gSA
[CR-143/2017]
(2 of 2)
izdj.k esa fdlh izdkj dk LFkxu vkns'k ugha gSA lEcfU/kr U;k;ky; ls izdj.k dh orZeku fLFkfr ds ckjs esa tkudkjh djus ij Kkr gqvk fd U;k;ky; }kjk ewy ;kfpdk fofo/k nhokuh la[;k 91@2015 dk fu.kZ; fnukad 12-01-2019 dks fd;k tk pqdk gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa ;g nhokuh iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk lkjghu gks pqdh gS] vr% mDrkuqlkj fujLr dh tkrh gSA LFkxu ,oa vU; dksbZ izkFkZuk&i= ;fn yfEcr gks] rks os Hkh mDrkuqlkj fuLrkfjr fd, tkrs gSaA
(SHUBHA MEHTA),J
AJAY KUMAR SINGHAL /09
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the present revision proceeding is maintainable given that the High Court has recorded a decision on the matter ex-parte.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Kishan Murari
Smt. Asha Devi
Shubha Mehta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
