Showing posts with label review petition. Show all posts
Showing posts with label review petition. Show all posts

Tuesday, 25 February 2025

What is the effect of SC recalling its Judgment in Review Petition?

When the Supreme Court recalls its judgment in a review petition, it has significant implications for the legal system. This action essentially renders the recalled judgment as "Non est," meaning it no longer exists unless specific provisions are made in the recall order to preserve certain aspects of it. Here's a breakdown of the effects of such a recall:

Once a judgment is recalled, any legal principles or ratios established by it lose their binding authority. This means that courts and parties can no longer rely on or cite these principles as legal precedents in future cases. The recalled judgment is effectively invalidated, and its influence on subsequent legal decisions is nullified.

Print Page

Sunday, 27 November 2016

Whether review petition by stranger to compromise decree is tenable?

In   that   view   of   the   matter,   this
Court   is   of   the   opinion   that   the   review
application deserves no consideration.   This
Court is bound by the ratio laid down in two
judgments delivered at Principal Seat, cited
across   the   bar   by   the   learned   counsel
appearing for the respondents in the case of
Khalil Haji Bholumiya Salar (cited supra) and
also in the case of Ramkrishna Shridhar & Ors
(cited supra) wherein the view is taken that
stranger   to   the   suit   is   a   stranger   to   the
agreement of compromise and he cannot file an
application   either   in   the   suit   or   in   the
appeal proceedings to challenge a compromise
decree as he is not a party to the suit, bar
under  Rule   3A  of   Order   23  of  CPC   cannot   be
extended to him, said provision must confine
only   to   the   parties   to   the   suit   who   are
parties to the compromise agreement, stranger
to   a   compromise   decree   cannot   file   an

application   in   a   suit   or   an   appeal   to
challenge   a   compromise   as   not   being   lawful,
but   must   file   a   separate   suit   for   the
purpose.   
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5416 OF 2012
IN 
SECOND APPEAL NO. 356 OF 2001
WITH 
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5417 OF 2012 
Gaurishankar s/o.Rukhmeshchandra Mishra,  

V
 Asaram s/o. Shankar Jagdale,  

      CORAM:  S.S.SHINDE, J.  
      
Dated : 30.08.2016 
Citation:2016 (6) ALLMR 378,2017(1) MHLJ 122
Print Page