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

2003 Supreme(Cal) 404

PRATAP KUMAR RAY
SUSHIL KUMAR DE – Appellant
Versus
CHHAYA DE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AMITAVA CHANDRA, DEBASIS KAR GUPTA, KAMAL KUMAR PATHAK, KRISHNAPADA PAL, Saptangshu Basu, Sudhis Das Gupta

P. K. RAY, J.

( 1 ) THIS application under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed by the plaintiff/petitioner challenging the order dated 17th May, 2002 passed by learned 5th Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Alipore in Miscellaneous Case No. 7 of 2002, arising out of title suit No. 18 of 1991 whereby and whereunder the application dated 1st April 2002 of the plaintiff/petitioner praying recall of the order dated 27th March, 2002 passed in Msic. Case No. 7 of 2002 was rejected. The opposite parties of this revisional application has raised the question of maintainability of this revisional application under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the ground that the impugned order is an appealable order. Hence, before going into the merit of the matter, this Court heard the parties on issue about maintainability of the revisional application.

( 2 ) BEFORE dealing with the said question, a factual matrix is required to be dealt with for proper adjudication of the issue. Miscelleneous Case No. 7 of 2002 arose with reference to the application filed by the plaintiff/petitioner praying for setting aside the Order dated 21st September 2001 and thereby restorati

























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