PANKAJ MITHAL
Ravindra Kumar Agrawal – Appellant
Versus
Sachin Agrawal – Respondent
Pankaj Mithal,J.
This is a revision to the High Court under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Court Act, 1887 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the order passed by the Small Causes Court.
2. The office has reported the revision to be beyond time by 35 days by taking the limitation for filing the revision to be 30 days.
3. Learned counsel for the revisionists has questioned the period of the limitation of 30 days for filing a revision under Section 25 of the Act before the High Court and has contended that the limitation is 90 days as per Article 131 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963 inasmuch as no period for filing revision before the High Court has been provided under Section 25 of the Act and the limitation of 30 days provided therein is for a revision before the District Judge/Additional District Judge only.
4. Section 25 of the Act in its application to the State of U.P. reads as under : -
"25. Revision of decrees and orders of Courts of Small Causes.?The District Judge, for the purpose of satisfying himself that a decree or order made in any case decided by a Court of Small Causes was according to law, may of his own motion, or on the applicatio
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.