The single judge court dismissed a Civil Revision Petition. The Court distinguished a cited Rajasthan High Court decision as inapplicable to the facts. No interference was found with the impugned order.
The Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.
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.
THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4822 OF 2011
Dated: 23.12.2011
Between : M.Divya … Petitioner And
M.Ravikanth Reddy
… Respondent
The Court made the following:-
THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 4822 OF 2011
O R D E R:
Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the material available on record, I do not find any justifiable reason to interfere with the order under Revision.
The decision of the High Court of Rajasthan in Jot Ram vs. Taru Ra m[1] , has no application to the facts and circumstances of the case and therefore, the Court below cannot be said to have committed any error in dismissing the application.
Accordingly, the Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.
___________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 23.12.2011 Ivd
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Civil Revision Petition should be allowed interfering with the order under revision.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jot Ram vs. Taru RamDistinguished¶10
1969 ILR 989 (Raj) · Who else cites this
M.Divya
M.Ravikanth Reddy
G. ROHINI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
