Back
AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH
Madusudan Pitre S/o Sadashiv @ Adhochaj Bhatt Pitre – Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr. Collector Chhatarpur M. P. Further Thr. The Officer In Charge Sahayak Bhu Mapan Adhikari Dist. Chhatarpur (Madhya Pradesh) – Respondent
ORDER :
1. A co-ordinate bench of this Court by order dated 04.08.2022 in Civil Revision No. 175/2020 Madhusudan Pitre and ors. Vs. State of M.P. allowed the revision and set aside the order dated 17.03.2020 (Annexure P/1) passed in MJC No. 83/2019 (MJC No. 161/2019) In State Vs. Madhusudan Pitre and ors. by the learned 5th Additional District Judge, Chhatarpur, District Chhatarpur, whereby, an application preferred by the respondent / State under Section 5 of Limitation Act accompanying an appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure was allowed.
2. The State has filed I.A. No. 7818/2023 on 16.05.2023 seeking review/recall/modification of order dated 04.08.2022. In substance, as per the application one Nageshwar Sadashiv Pitre filed a Civil Suit bearing No. 4A/1997 against Madhusudan and ors. in which State Government was not a party. This civil suit was decided on 24.12.2005 whereby the trial Court held that plaintiff is not entitled for any declaration of title in respect of specific part of suit property, however, held that property belongs to undivided joint family property between plaintiff and defendant. Copy of that order is Annexure is P-2. No appeal was filed but
The distinction between error apparent on the face of the record and an erroneous order, and the limited scope of review under Order 47 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code.
The State Government could not have granted permission to the respondent no.3 Corporation to initiate the revision application after expiry of 55 years mechanically and that also without application ....
The court ruled that a party cannot justify an inordinate delay in filing a review petition based on subsequent overruling of a prior decision, as it violates the principles of limitation and suffici....
The court emphasized the necessity of considering sufficient cause regarding delays in petition filings and distinguished between dismissal and disposal of cases, asserting review jurisdiction must b....
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
