Kewal Krishan VS Sham Lal

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL
Kewal Krishan – Appellant
Versus
Sham Lal – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Suraj Padha, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Varun Raina, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Vinod Chatterji Koul, J.—Review of the Order dated 16th December 2023, passed by this Court in CM(M) no.122/2022 titled as Kewal Krishan v. Sham Lal, is sought on the grounds made mention of in the instant petition.

2. I have heard counsel for parties and considered the matter.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that it was the case of petitioner that order dated 6th August 2022 is against the law as interpreted by various courts with respect to the scope of Order VIII Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure and that the proposed Replica contradicts the main plaint inasmuch as the date of commencement of tenancy in the plaint is specifically mentioned with effect from 1 st January 2010, but petitioner exposed the mischief of respondent/ plaintiff by placing on record a copy of demand draft of Rs.8.00 Lakhs in 2009 in they name of respondent towards the purchase of subject matter of suit, respondent sought to explain it by terming it as arrears of rent by proposed Replica. It is also stated that any order of trial court which is manifestly unjust and causes miscarriage of justice is open to supervisory scrutiny of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitut