Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Viney Mittal, J.
Ganga Ram - Petitioner
Versus
Mahant Raghbir Dass - Respondent
Civil Revision No. 1905 of 2000.
Decided On : 22 March, 2004
Section 47 - Objector - The court dismissed the revision petition under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, stating that the earlier order had attained finality when the court had dismissed the earlier revision petition, making the present revision petition without merit.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an objector, filed objections under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the execution of a decree. Despite previous dismissals, the objector persisted and approached the court through the present revision petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no justification to interfere in the present revision petition, as the earlier order had attained finality when the court dismissed the earlier revision petition, making the present revision petition without merit. The court dismissed the revision.
Issues: Persistence of the objector in filing objections against the execution of the decree despite previous dismissals.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the fact that the earlier order had attained finality when the court dismissed the earlier revision petition, making the present revision petition without merit.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the revision petition, stating that it was without merit.
Viney Mittal, J. - The petitioner is an objector. He filed objections under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the execution of decree dated November 15, 1989.
2. Earlier also, objections were filed by the petitioner against the execution of the aforesaid decree. The said objections were dismissed by the learned executing Court vide Order dated March 15, 1999. A civil revision was filed against the said dismissal order being Civil Revision No. 3699 of 1999. The revision petition was also dismissed by this Court vide order dated December 8, 1999.
3. Still not satisfied, the judgment debtor again filed the objections. The aforesaid objections were dismissed by the learned executing Court vide order dated 22.2.2000. The objector has still persisted and approached this Court through the present revision petition.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I do not find any justification to interfere in the present revision petition. Since the earlier order has attained finality when this Court had dismissed the earlier revision petition filed by the petitioner vide Order dated December 8, 1999, the present revision petition is absolutely without any merit.
Dismissed.
Revision dismissed.
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
