JOHN MATHEW
VELUNNI – Appellant
Versus
APPU – Respondent
1. The execution court entered full satisfaction of the decree and dismissed the execution petition on 27-3-1980. The decree-holder thereafter filed an application to review that order on the ground that recording of full satisfaction was made by a mistake apparent from the records, as further amounts are due from the judgment-debtors. However the execution court dismissed that application observing that there is no provision to review an order passed in an execution petition recording full satisfaction of the decree. In this Civil Revision Petition challenging that order, although the judgment-debtors accepted notice, they have not entered appearance. Therefore at my request Sri. K. T. Sankaran, Advocate appeared as amicus curiae.
2. 0.47 R.l of the Code of Civil Procedure is as follows:
"l. Application for review of judgment. (l) Any person considering himself aggrieved
(a) by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed, but from which no appeal has been preferred,
(b) by a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed, or
(c) by a decision on a reference from a Court of Small Causes, and who, from the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after
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.