Whether S 144 of CPC is applicable if there is no variation or reversal of decree or order in appeal or revision?

Section 144 applies to a situation where a decree or an order is varied or reversed in appeal, revision or any other proceeding or is set aside or modified in any suit instituted for the purpose. In that situation, the Court which has passed the decree may cause restitution to be made, on an application of any party entitled, so as to place the parties in the position which they would have occupied but for the decree or order or such part thereof as has been varied, reversed, set aside or modified. The court is empowered to pass orders which are consequential in nature to the decree or order being varied or reversed.

12. In the present case, the interim order of the Trial court did not require the Defendant to hand over the possession to the Plaintiff. There was no decree or order of the Trial court by virtue of which the Appellant was given possession of the property, nor did any decree or order mandate that the Respondent hand over possession to the Appellant.

13. In these circumstances, the provisions of Section 144, Code of Civil Procedure were not attracted there being no variation or reversal of a decree or order as contemplated by Section 144.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 880 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 2378 of 2006)

Decided On: 21.01.2019

 Murti Bhawani Mata Mandir  Vs.  Ramesh and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud and Hemant Gupta, JJ.

Citation: AIR 2019 SC 679

Print Page

Whether trial court should rely on print out of order uploaded on official website of high court?

 Learned   counsel   for   the   applicant   has   expressed   an

apprehension that the order of this Court dated 20.12.2017 as well

as   this   order,   would   be   available   on   the   official   website   of   the

Bombay High Court and there is a possibility that since it would not

be a certified copy of the order, the trial Court may insist upon

producing a certified copy. 

2. I am of the view that this apprehension is misplaced since the

print out of the orders of this Court from the official website has

sanctity and the trial Courts are expected to consider the said orders,

if they are cited after taking a print out from the official website.

The said orders are also available before the trial Court from the

official website and there can be a counter verification to find out

whether such an order is actually uploaded to the official website or

not. In this backdrop, there is no harm if such a print out from the

official website is placed before this Court.

3. It is informed by the learned Advocates that, in several cases

before various trial Courts, the learned Judges insist on production

of   the   certified   copy   of   the   order   and   they   are   not   inclined   to

consider the print out of an order from the official website of the

Bombay High Court, as being a reliable document. As observed in

the foregoing paragraphs, in the event of any doubt in the mind of

the learned Judge, it can be checked from the official website of the

Bombay High Court as to whether such an order has been uploaded

or not? Once the order is uploaded on the official website, it is a

reliable document to be considered by the Court before whom it is

cited.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 244 OF 2017

SHITAL KRUSHNA DHAKE  V KRUSHNA DAGDU DHAKE 

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

Dated: February 02, 2018

Print Page

Whether registration of copy of decree or order of court is permissible under registration Act?

But the main question for consideration is whether the Registration Act authorises the registration of a certified copy of a document when the original is lost or not produced by the party when called upon to do so by the registering authority. There is no express provision in that Act authorising the registration of a copy of a document. The only exception is as regards copies of decrees or orders of court for which special provisions have been made in the proviso toSection 23 and Sub-section (5) of Section 34. Copy of decree has also been referred to inSection 58(1). Hence, when the Registration Act expressly provides for the registration of a copy of a decree or order of a court and does not make such a provision as regards a certified copy of a private document such as a deed of sale, there seems to be no authority for registration of such a certified copy.1

Patna High Court

Sadhu Singh vs Ramawadh Singh And Ors. on 27 April, 1966

Equivalent citations: AIR 1966 Pat 369

Bench: R Narasimham, A Ahmad

Print Page

Whether it is permissible to effect service of summons to kitchen boy?

The Apex Court has observed that Section 37C(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 states that any decision, order, summons or notice may either be sent by registered post with acknowledgement due to the person for whom it is intended or his authorized agent. If this mode of service is unsuccessful then service can be effect by affixation. It is an anathema in law to decide a matter without due notice to the concerned party. Every effort must be taken to meaningfully and realistically serve the affected party so as not merely to ensure that he has knowledge thereof but also to enable him to initiate any permissible action.
The Appellant
justifiably submits that it was statutorily impermissible for the Respondents to
serve the Adjudication Order on a “kitchen boy”, who is not even a middle
level officer and certainly not an authorized agent of the Appellant. not at all.”
The Inspector who ostensibly served the copy of the Order should have known
the requirements of the statute and therefore should have insisted on an
acknowledgement either by the Appellant or by its authorized agent. 
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPRME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 5631-5632 OF 2015
[Arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos. 22905-22906 of 2014]
SARAL WIRE CRAFT PVT. LTD.
V
COMMISSIONER CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE
& SERVICE TAX, & ORS.
Dated;20th July, 2015.

Print Page

Delhi High Court: CCI Has Inherent Powers To Review/Recall Its Orders

Such a power has to be exercised on the well recognized parameters of the power of review / recall and without lengthy arguments and without the investigation already ordered being stalled indefinitely. In fact, it is up to the CCI to also upon being so called upon to recall / review its order under Section 26(1) of the Act to decide whether to, pending the said decision, stall the investigation or not, as observed hereinabove also. The jurisdiction of review / recall would be exercised only if without entering into any factual controversy, CCI finds no merit in the complaint / reference on which investigation had been ordered. The application for review / recall of the order under Section 26(1) of the Act is not to become the Section 26(8) stage of the Act.

 We therefore answer the question framed hereinabove for adjudication in affirmative and hold that respondent No.1 CCI has the power to recall / review the order under Section 26(1) of the Act but within the parameters and subject to the restrictions discussed above.

Delhi High Court

Google Inc. & Ors vs Competition Commission Of India & ... on 27 April, 2015

Author: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw

Print Page

How to ascertain Meaning of “expression accidental omission” in judgment and order?

  Now we have to examine whether by  the  impugned  order,  the
      High Court has only corrected the clerical, arithmetical or accidental
      omission in the decree passed or not.  To appreciate the  same,  first
      we think it necessary to mention  as  to  what  the  word  “expression
      accidental omission” means.  In Master Construction Co. (P)  Ltd.  Vs.
      State of Orissa and Another AIR 1966 SC 1047, expression –  accidental
      slip or omission has been explained as an  error  due  to  a  careless
      mistake or omission unintentionally made.  It is further  observed  in
      the said case that there is another  qualification,  namely,  such  an
      error shall be apparent on the face of the record, that is to say,  it
      is not an error which depends for its discovery,  elaborate  arguments
      on questions of fact or law.
REPORTABLE



                 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                  CIVIL APPEAL NOs.2352-2354 OF 2008



      SRIHARI     V  SYED MAQDOOM SHAH  
Citation;2014 ALLSCR3634
Read original judgment here; click here

Print Page