Back
RAVI NATH TILHARI
Sunkavalli Subba Rao – Appellant
Versus
Godavari Rubber Industries Pvt. Ltd – Respondent
JUDGMENT
RAVI NATH TILHARI, J. - Heard Smt.M.V.Ramana Kumari, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record.
2. This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:
"The Hon'ble Court may be pleased a) to allow the Civil Revision Petition setting aside the order passed by the Principal District Judge, Rajahmundry in I.A.No.Nil/2023 (unnumbered) in O.S.No.195 of 2015 dtd. 21/9/2023; b) to direct the principal District Judge, Rajahmundry to dispose of the application in accordance with law, affording reasonable opportunity to this petitioner; c) Issue further appropriate directions as may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice".
3. The petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.195 of 2015 on the file of Principal District Judge, Rajahmundry.
4. The case of the petitioner is that he purchased the property, subject matter of suit, from respondent No.2 - Andhra Pradesh State Finance Corporation for valid consideration. But the transfer deed was not executed, so the suit was filed against respondent Nos. 1 & 2 for specific performance of agreement of sale dtd. 14/9/2015. The suit was decreed ex
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of filing a certified copy of the decree along with the memorandum of appeal, and the court's consideration of the maintainability ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a party approaching the court must do so with clean hands and must not engage in forum shopping. Additionally, the judgment and decree passed ....
The court emphasized that a petitioner must act with diligence and clean hands when invoking Article 227, especially when challenging an ex-parte decree after an unreasonable delay.
A judgment must contain a concise statement of the case, points for determination, and reasons for the decision; failure to comply renders it invalid.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India may not be maintainable if the petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing an app....
The executing court cannot go behind the decree unless it is a nullity, and re-agitating objections already dismissed in a previous petition would amount to an abuse of process of law.
Revision petitions under Section 115 are non-maintainable against orders passed under Section 96; appeal should be under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The executing court cannot stay execution of its own decree; such authority lies with the appellate court.
(1) Revision – Where an appealable decree has been passed in a suit, no revision should be entertained under Section 115 of CPC against an order rejecting on merits a review of that decree.(2) Exerci....
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
