9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The maintainability of a special leave petition against the order passed in a review petition. Judgment Summary: Issue 1: Maintainability of special leave petition against order in review petition The appeal challenged the judgment and order of the High Court dismissing the review petition. The appellant argued that the issue required reconsideration by a three-Judge Bench based on the provisions of Order 47 Rule 7 of the CPC. The Court considered previous decisions, including Vinod Kapoor v. State of Goa, Suseel Finance & Leasing Co. v. M. Lata, and M.N Haider v. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan. It was observed that a special leave petition under Article 136 of the Constitution is not maintainable against the order rejecting the review petition alone. The Court emphasized the importance of respecting previous judgments and dismissed the appeal as not maintainable. Issue 2: Maintainability of special leave petition after withdrawing earlier petition Another appeal challenged the judgment and order of the High Court dismissing the writ petition. The Court noted that the petitioner had withdrawn a previous special leave petition with permission to pursue a review instead, without seeking permission to challenge the High Court's order afresh in case the review was unsuccessful. Citing Vinod Kapoor v. State of Goa, the Court held that the civil appeal was not maintainable and dismissed it without delving into the case's merits. The Court rejected the argument that the issue had been referred to a larger Bench in a different case, stating that the facts were distinct and the reference order did not apply. This summary provides a detailed overview of the judgment, highlighting the key issues and the Court's decisions on each matter.
|
