Revisional order holding that a petitioner who claims to have been served an ex parte attachment notice must file an application to vacate that specific order before approaching the High Court in revision.
Civil Revision Petition dismissed; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
Civil Revision Petition No.2738 of 2017
ORDER:
Aggrieved by a notice of attachment issued under Section 68 (2) of the Chief Funds Act, 1982 (wrongly typed as under Section 88 (2) of the Act), the subscriber to a chit, who took the prize money, has come up with the above revision.
VRS, J
2
CRP.No.2738 of 2016
Therefore, with the above liberty, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
________________________ V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J
Date: 16-06-2017
Ksn
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a revision petitioner who has taken no action to challenge an ex parte order below can approach this Court directly.
Subscriber (Winner)
Deputy Registrar of Chits
V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
