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

2016 Supreme(All) 1136

RAN VIJAI SINGH
SUNIL KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Nipun Singh and Anurag Khanna for the Petitioner; C.S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Ran Vijai Singh, J.—Heard Sri Nipun Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the State-respondents.

2. Through this writ petition, prayer has been made to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 9.9.2016 passed by the Additional Collector (Finance and Revenue) Hapur by which the earlier order dated 23.5.2016 passed in Case No. D2016117300171 (State v. Sunil Kumar) has been set aside and 14.9.2016 has been fixed for hearing and evidence.

3. While assailing the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the petitioner has made following submissions :

(i) The order impugned is patently illegal for the reason that the recall application itself was not maintainable as the counsel for the applicant seeking recall was heard, therefore the order was not ex parte order.

(ii) Alongwith the recall application, an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act 1908 was filed on 29.7.2016 but without disposing of the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the application seeking recall of the order dated 23.5.2016 has been allowed illegally.

(iii) Since no ground was taken in the application that on 23.5.2016, the counsel
































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