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

2000 Supreme(Ori) 447

P.K.MISRA
BRUNDABAN SAHOO – Appellant
Versus
ANTARYAMI SAHOO – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P.K. Panda, for the Appellant; S.C. Pani, P.K. Paikray, M.K. Pati, P.R. Routray and S. Samal Advs., for the Respondent

JUDGMENT :

P.K. Misra, J. - This writ application is directed against the order under Annexure-8 passed by the Land Reforms Commissioner-cum-Settlement Commissioner, Orissa, Cuttack (in short, the "Commissioner").It appears that present opposite party No. 1 had filed Settlement Revision Case No. 4 of 1997 in the Court of the Commissioner and after hearing both parties, the revision was dismissed by order dated 12-5-1998. Thereafter,present opposite party No. 1 filed Misc. Case No. 53 of 1998 for recalling the order dated 12-5-1998 and the Commissioner has recalled the earlier order and allowed the revision of present opposite party No. 1. as per order under Annexure-8. Such order is being impugned on the ground that the Commissioner did not have any jurisdiction to entertain an application for review.

2. Learned Counsel appearing for opposite party No. 1 submitted that every Court or tribunal has got inherent power to recall its earlier decision and as such it cannot be said that order under Annexure-8 is without jurisdiction.

3. Law is well settled that power of review of earlier judicial or quasi judicial order can be exercised only if there is a specific provision contained in the






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