Mahendra Vs. Narendra Kumar - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1042424
SubjectEducation
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided OnMay-01-2013
AppellantMahendra
RespondentNarendra Kumar
Advocates:Shri. Pradeep Navriya
Excerpt:
review petition no.313 / 2013 ( mahendra & others ..vs.narendra kumar & another ) 01-05-2013 heard shri pradeep navriya, learned counsel for the petitioners on the question of admission. the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the appellants, after the decision of the second appeal, have come to knot that the landlord has taken up proceedings in respect of another premises in the city of tikamgarh for eviction and in such circumstances the judgment and decree dated 15-3-2013 passed in second appeal no.223/2013 needs to be reviewed. it is settled law that a review is permissible only in case of glaring and apparent mistake which is evident from the face of the record of the case itself and is not permissible for re-hearing of the case or re-appreciation of the facts. in the present case there is no ground to review the judgment and decree dated 15-3-2013 passed by this court in second appeal no.223/2013 as there is no apparent mistake evident from the face of the record. the review petition is accordingly rejected. (r.s.jha) mct judge
Judgment:

Review Petition No.313 / 2013 ( Mahendra & others ..Vs.Narendra Kumar & another ) 01-05-2013 Heard Shri Pradeep Navriya, learned counsel for the petitioners on the question of admission.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the appellants, after the decision of the second appeal, have come to knot that the landlord has taken up proceedings in respect of another premises in the city of Tikamgarh for eviction and in such circumstances the judgment and decree dated 15-3-2013 passed in Second Appeal No.223/2013 needs to be reviewed.

It is settled law that a review is permissible only in case of glaring and apparent mistake which is evident from the face of the record of the case itself and is not permissible for re-hearing of the case or re-appreciation of the facts.

In the present case there is no ground to review the judgment and decree dated 15-3-2013 passed by this Court in Second Appeal No.223/2013 as there is no apparent mistake evident from the face of the record.

The review petition is accordingly rejected.

(R.S.Jha) mct Judge