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

1988 Supreme(All) 481

A.P.MISRA
SATISH CHANDRA – Appellant
Versus
KRISHNA PRASAD – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
V.K.MAHESHVARI, Y.K.SAXENA

A. P. MISHRA, J.


( 1 ) SINCE in this revision parties are represented and counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged it is being disposed of finally at the admission stage.

( 2 ) THE present revision is preferred as against an order dated 11th April, 1988, by virtue of which an application for amendment of the written statement was rejected. A preliminary objection was raised by the learned counsel for the respondents that the present revision is not maintainable in view of the proviso of Section 115, C. P. C. Under the second proviso it is referred : - ". . . . . . . . the High Court or the District Court shall not under this section, vary or reverse any order including an order deciding an issue, made in the course of a suit or other proceeding, except where- (i) the order, if so varied or reversed, would finally dispose of the suit or other proceedings; or (ii) the order, if allowed to stand, would occasion a failure of justice or cause irreparable injury to the party against whom it was made. " it was argued on the basis of this proviso that the matter is not revisable and the revision should be dismissed on the ground of maintainability.

( 3 ) THE present revision in







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