Back
THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
C.R.DASH
Management of Main Dam Division, Represented by the Executive Engineer – Appellant
Versus
Seshadev Kumbhar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for review of earlier judgment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. previous court's findings on evidence. (Para 3) |
| 3. petitioner's assertion of document forgery. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. arguments against the validity of the review petition. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 5. review powers discussed based on precedents. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. analysis of the evidence presented. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 7. review petition dismissed. (Para 19 , 20) |
Judgment :
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking review of the Order/Judgment dated 16.04.2015 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.13399 of 2012.
3. This Court disposed of the aforesaid writ petition with the following observation:-
Taking into consideration the evidence in its entirety and the findings of the learned Labour Court, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order, and the writ petition for that reason must fail. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, but without cost in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
“The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this petition, so as to file a review application before the High Court. Permission is granted.
5. In the review petition, it
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
