Miss Lucy
← All judgments

M/S Babu Ram Ashok Kumar vs Mushtaq Ali

Supreme Court29 June 2016Kurian Joseph · Rohinton Fali Nariman

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where an application for restoration of a review application has been dismissed on the ground that the applicant failed to prosecute the case diligently, but the review application itself was filed on time, the High Court should reconsider the review application on its merits rather than dismiss it solely for lack of diligent prosecution, particularly where the Supreme Court finds that the review application deserves consideration on merits.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

1

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 5454-55 OF 2016 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 994-995 OF 2015]

M/S BABU RAM ASHOK KUMAR Appellant(s)

VERSUS

MUSHTAQ ALI AND ORS Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The apepllant apparantly is aggrieved since the

application for restoration of the review of the

Judgment dated 28.11.2013 in RSA No. 287 of 1986 on

the file of Punjab and Haryana High Court was

dismissed.

3. There is no dispute that the review application

had been filed on time. It appears from the order

dismissing the application for restoration that the

applicant had not been prosecuting the case

diligently.

4. Having gone through the application and having

heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of

the view that the review application deserves to be Signature Not Verified

considered on merits.

Digitally signed by JAYANT KUMAR ARORA Date: 2016.07.02 13:05:35 IST Reason:

5. In that view of the matter, we refrain from

making any further observation on the merits of the 2

case. Therefore, we set aside the order dated

04.09.2014 in CM No. 9394-C of 2014 in RA No. 15-C of

2014 in RSA No. 287 of 1986 and restore the review

application to its original file. The matter is

remitted to the High Court for consideration of the

review application on merits.

6. We direct the parties to appear before the High

Court on 01.08.2016. In case the review petitioner

does not appear before the High Court on that date,

the review application shall stand dismissed.

7. Needless to say that it will be open to the

parties to raise all available contentions before the

High Court. The status quo order passed by this

Court on 06.01.2015 regarding possession shall

continue till the matter is disposed of by the High

Court.

8. With the above observations and directions, the

appeals are disposed of.

No costs.

.......................J. [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]

.......................J. [ ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ]

New Delhi;

JUNE 29, 2016.

3

ITEM NO.56 COURT NO.11 SECTION IVB

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 994-995/2015

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04/09/2014 in CM No. 9394/2014 28/11/2013 in RSA No. 287/1986 passed by the High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh)

M/S BABU RAM ASHOK KUMAR Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

MUSHTAQ ALI AND ORS Respondent(s)

(with interim relief and office report)

Date : 29/06/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

For Petitioner(s) Mr. S. Gurukrishna Kumar, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Hariharan, Adv.

Mr. Vikash Singh, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Dinesh Verma, Adv.

Mr. Rajat Sharma, Adv.

Mr. Subhasish Bhowmick, Adv.

UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

Leave granted.

The civil appeals are disposed of in terms of the signed

non-reportable Judgment.

Pending interlocutory applications, if any, are disposed of.

(Jayant Kumar Arora) (Chander Bala) Sr. P.A. Court Master

(Signed non-reportable Judgment is placed on the file)

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free