Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.R.Swaminathan, R.Poornima, JJ
Nagu – Appellant
Versus
District Collector – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. review jurisdiction is not available for re-evaluating factual findings without a demonstrable error apparent on the record. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
PRAYER: Review Application filed under Order 47 Rule 1 r/w Section 114 of CPC to allow this review petition by setting aside the order made in W.P(MD)No.15052 of 2010 dated 26.11.2014 on the file of this Court.
For Petitioner : No Appearance
For Respondents : Mr.M.P.Senthil
Government Advocate
for R.1 to R.5
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by G.R.Swaminathan J.)
None appears for the review applicant. The review applicant filed the writ petition way back in the year 2010 and the same was disposed of on 26.11.2014. This review application was filed in the year 2016.
2.We went through the order passed by this Court. The writ petition was merely disposed of on the strength of the report filed by the District Collector. Factual aspects are involved. We do not find any error apparent on the face of the record.
3.This Review Application stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
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
