Skip to content


Jai Mangal Chand Vs. Ganpat Chand - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Reported inAIR1925All541
AppellantJai Mangal Chand
RespondentGanpat Chand
Excerpt:
- .....not valid. he thereupon proceeded under para 16 to pass the decree in terms of the award. from that decree no appeal lies. still less can a revision lie on the grounds which are now urged. i dismiss this application with.....
Judgment:

Daniels, J.

1. This is an application in revision against a decree which has bean passed in accordance with an award under para 16 of the second schedule of the Code of Civil Procedure. A preliminary objection is taken that no revision lies and that objection must prevail. The case is covered by the ruling in Ajudhia Prasad v. Badar-ul-Hussain (1917) 39 All. 489. The learned Judge of the Court below proceeded strictly in accordance with the law. After the award was made certain objections to its validity were put in. He heard and determined those objections in accordance with law and decided that they were not valid. He thereupon proceeded under para 16 to pass the decree in terms of the award. From that decree no appeal lies. Still less can a revision lie on the grounds which are now urged. I dismiss this application with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //