SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1983 Supreme(SC) 113

D.A.DESAI, RANGANATH MISRA
Udai Bhan Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Hari Shankar Bansal – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Respondent commenced an action in ejectment on diverse grounds available under the U. P. Rent Act against the appellant. The action ended in a decree in favour of the respondent. Appellant moved a revision application before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad under S. 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act read with Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. At the hearing of the revision petition, a preliminary objection was taken on behalf of the respondents that the revision petition was barred by limitation. Reliance was placed on the amendment to S. 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act as amended by U. P. Act No. 17 of 1966 in its application to the State of U. P. It reads as under :

"The District Judge, for the purpose of satisfying himself that a decree or order made in any case decided by a Court of Small Causes was according to law, may of his own motion, or on the application of an aggrieved party made within thirty days from the days of such decree or order, call for the case and pass such order with respect thereto as he thinks fit."

By the U. P. Civil Laws Amendment Act 37 of 1972, a proviso was engrafted to the S. 25 extracted hereinabove. I








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top