Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA
Dinesh Bindal – Appellant
Versus
Raj Kanwar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for review of the order dated 13.6.2024, passed in CMP No. 11213 of 2023 in Civil Revision No. 210 of 2022. It has been asserted that the Court had allowed the application bearing CMP No. 11213 of 2023 in Civil Revision No. 210 of 2022. The Court had wrongly recorded that the judgment/order of eviction was passed on31.10.2022, whereas the learned Trial Court passed the order of eviction on 4.1.2022. The Court had failed to clarify the period for which the mesne profit was allowed. Hence the petition.
2. The petition is opposed by filing a reply taking a preliminary objection regarding lack of maintainability. It was asserted that there is no error on the face of the record. The applicant failed to mention the area of the accommodation. There is no clerical error or any other error apparent on the face of the record. Therefore, it was prayed that the present petition be dismissed.
3. I have heard Mr Ajay Kochhar, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr Varun Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr Sumit Sood, learned counsel for the respondent.
4. Mr. Ajay Kochhar, learned Senior Counsel for the petiti
Review jurisdiction requires a party to be aggrieved and for there to be a mistake apparent on the record to justify corrections in the previous order.
A review petition can be allowed if an application for additional evidence was overlooked, constituting an error apparent on the record.
Mesne profits should be deposited in a fixed deposit during appeals, not paid to landlords, unless special reasons are provided.
A review application would be maintainable only on specific grounds such as discovery of new and important matter or evidence, mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, or for any other su....
Mesne profits can only be claimed from the date of the eviction decree, not from the date of filing the suit, as possession remains lawful until the decree is passed.
A claim for future mesne profits is a distinct cause of action and can be validly pursued even if not initially included in a decree for possession, negating previous res judicata arguments.
Mesne profits are payable from the date of lease termination, and the Appellate Court can extend payment periods and correct errors in lower court decisions.
(1) Once a decree for possession has been passed and execution is delayed depriving decree holder to reap fruits, it is necessary for Appellate Court to pass appropriate orders fixing reasonable mesn....
A review petition must demonstrate an error apparent on the face of the record; it cannot be used as a means to reargue the case.
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
