Skip to content


Jhamman Lal Vs. Manni Ram - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported inAIR1917All215(1); 39Ind.Cas.570
AppellantJhamman Lal
RespondentManni Ram
Excerpt:
civil procedure code (act v of 1908), section 115 - revision, nature of--applicant, duty of. - - in this case the order complained of was made on the 22nd of december 1915. it was an order directing a new trial......1915. it was an order directing a new trial. the trial was held on the 6th of march 1916. the applicant attended and took part in it and lost. on the 28th of march he applied to this court for the first time complaining of the order of which he had sought to take advantage by attending the hearing on the 6th of march. in our view the application was made by him much too late and ought not to be entertained for one moment on that account alone. it further appears that it was made in the hope of having a second attempt to get rid of the order passed against him. the application is dismissed with cost sectionstuart, j.2. i concur.3. by the court.--application dismissed with costs accordingly.
Judgment:

Walsh, J.

1. As has always been said revision is a privilege and not a right. In my view it corresponds speaking generally to the remedies in England known as certiorari and mandamu Section The invariable rule in these cases is that a party aggrieved must come to the High Court for relief at the earliest possible moment and also must come with no ulterior purpose. In this case the order complained of was made on the 22nd of December 1915. It was an order directing a new trial. The trial was held on the 6th of March 1916. The applicant attended and took part in it and lost. On the 28th of March he applied to this Court for the first time complaining of the order of which he had sought to take advantage by attending the hearing on the 6th of March. In our view the application was made by him much too late and ought not to be entertained for one moment on that account alone. It further appears that it was made in the hope of having a second attempt to get rid of the order passed against him. The application is dismissed with cost Section

Stuart, J.

2. I concur.

3. By the Court.--Application dismissed with costs accordingly.


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