Full Text
Translation output
A-43 C~)
% 04.08.2011
Present: Petitioner-in-person.
+ CM No. 14360/2011 in CM (M) NO. 888/2011
*
Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions.
CM (M) NO. 888/2011
The order impugned before this court is the order dated
0 1.06.2011 vide which the review petition filed by the petitioner seeking a review of the order dated 25.04.2011 had been dismissed. Record shows that on 25.04.2011, none had appeared on behalf of the petitioner; the application under Section 113 read with Section 151 of the Code of the Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') had been filed by the plaintiff seeking a reference to the High Court regarding the validity of certain amendments made by the Amendment Act, 2002 in the Code of the
Civil Procedure; thus application had been dismissed; the contention of the plaintiff that the amendments are contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court had been repelled. Thereafter a review had been sought of .the order dated 25.04.2011. The same had been dismissed on 01.06.2011. Court had noted that no ground is made out to review the order. Arguments urged before this court are totally out of context; it is submitted that there is an application which has been filed by the petitioner, which is pending
2011:DHC:8827
) in the court below wherein it has been sought that there are certain documents which are suppressed by the defendant and the same should be taken of the record; They should be thrown out.
This contention has been noted in para 3 of the impugned order where the court had observed that no ground is made out to review the earlier order dated 25.04.2011 which had not dealt with this contention; moreover this question cannot be decided, at this stage, when the parties are yet to go to trial. Impugned order in no manner calls for any interference.
% 04.08.2011
Present: Petitioner-in-person.
+ CM No. 14360/2011 in CM (M) NO. 888/2011
*
Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions.
CM (M) NO. 888/2011
The order impugned before this court is the order dated
0 1.06.2011 vide which the review petition filed by the petitioner seeking a review of the order dated 25.04.2011 had been dismissed. Record shows that on 25.04.2011, none had appeared on behalf of the petitioner; the application under Section 113 read with Section 151 of the Code of the Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') had been filed by the plaintiff seeking a reference to the High Court regarding the validity of certain amendments made by the Amendment Act, 2002 in the Code of the
Civil Procedure; thus application had been dismissed; the contention of the plaintiff that the amendments are contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court had been repelled. Thereafter a review had been sought of .the order dated 25.04.2011. The same had been dismissed on 01.06.2011. Court had noted that no ground is made out to review the order. Arguments urged before this court are totally out of context; it is submitted that there is an application which has been filed by the petitioner, which is pending
2011:DHC:8827
) in the court below wherein it has been sought that there are certain documents which are suppressed by the defendant and the same should be taken of the record; They should be thrown out.
This contention has been noted in para 3 of the impugned order where the court had observed that no ground is made out to review the earlier order dated 25.04.2011 which had not dealt with this contention; moreover this question cannot be decided, at this stage, when the parties are yet to go to trial. Impugned order in no manner calls for any interference.
JUDGMENT
40 Petition is dismissed.
AUGUST 04, 2011 rb INDERMEET KAUR, J. 2011:DHC:8827