Back
AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Limited – Appellant
Versus
Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Pensioners Welfare Association (Regd. ) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. non-maintainability of the special leave petition is established. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. impact on financial security and operational viability of the petitioner-bank discussed. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. preliminary objection of maintainability needs evaluation before proceeding. (Para 8 , 10) |
| 4. doctrine of merger and maintainability of review petitions clarified. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. finality of appeals and procedural directives regarding claims. (Para 19 , 22 , 25 , 26) |
JUDGMENT :
Heard learned senior counsel Mr. Kapil Sibal, Mr. Kavin Gulati and Mr. Shadan Farasat, for their respective parties, alongwith learned counsel assisting them.
2. At the outset, Mr. Kavin Gulati, learned senior counsel for respondent no.1, raised the issue of non-maintainability of the instant Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution of India (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Constitution’). The parties have, thus, addressed us on the same.
3. Mr. Gulati, learned senior counsel, submitted that the present petition is not maintainable for the reason that the original Judgment dated 15.05.2012 in CWP No.1679/2010 [2012:HHC:4682], as passed by the learned Single Judge of th
A party cannot re-litigate previously decided matters in a Special Leave Petition unless specific leave is granted, reinforcing the principle of finality in judicial decisions.
Special Leave Petition – Only after issue of maintainability is decided upon, can Supreme Court enter into merits of case – No appeal by way of Special Leave Petition against order passed in review i....
A second special leave petition is not maintainable after the first is withdrawn without permission to re-approach the court.
A review petition cannot be used to reargue a case on merits and must point out an error apparent on the record; otherwise, it is not maintainable.
Inherent power to review exists when decisions are made without jurisdiction, allowing for restoration of appeal to avoid injustice.
A review application filed by a subsequent counsel who had not argued the original case is not maintainable.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
