J.P.SINGH
KAMA VATI – Appellant
Versus
CHANDER BHAN – Respondent
( 2 ) I have heard Mr. S. P. Chug, Advocate learned counsel for the applicants/respondents/plaintiffs and Mr. S. K. Sharma, Advocate learned counsel for the non-applicant/petitioner/defendant.
( 3 ) IT will be helpful to refer briefly to the facts of this case. The opposite party to this application had filed a petition under Article 227 of the constitution of India [c. M. (M)] against an order dated 19. 8. 2004 passed by the civil Judge, Delhi allowing an application for review under Order XLVII Rule 1 and 2 CPC read with Section 3 and 5 of the Limitation Act. The learned civil judge had set aside a consent order vide order dated 19. 8. 2004, which was challenged under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The said C. M. (M)was allowed by this court and the impugned order dated 19. 8. 2004 was set aside. It was directed by this court that the proceeding will commence from the stage where the same were before passing of the impugned order and the learned trial court judge was directed to make efforts to dispose o
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.