THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Anu Sivaraman, G Basavaraja, JJ
Thirumalaiah – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. review is not a re-hearing; findings of fact cannot be reopened. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE 1 OF THE CPC, 1908 PRAYING TO:- I. REVIEW THE JUDGMENT DATED 30.12.2024 PASSED IN W.A.NO.219/2022 (SC ST); II. CONSEQUENTLY, ALLOW THE W.A.NO.219/2022 (SC ST). FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT; AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)
1. Heard learned counsel for Review Petitioners.
2. We have considered the averments in the Review Petition and the grounds raised therein. The main ground urged in the Review Petition to justify the review of the judgment is that, the order of the Deputy Commissioner was one passed without notice to the appellant which justifies the delay in filing the writ petition. However, we notice that there is a specific finding recorded by the learned Single Judge that the order of the Deputy Commissioner was passed after notice to the appellants and on their being represented before the Deputy Commi
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.