Suresh vs Commissioner, Gkp. & Others
2013 Latest Caselaw 4879 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?AFR
 
Court No. - 31
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7883 of 1995
 

 
Petitioner :- Suresh
 
Respondent :- Commissioner, Gkp. & Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- H.S.N.Tripathi,Juned Alam,P.S.Tripathi,Sheo Ram Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Sharma,Kushal Kant,P.K.Mishra
 

 
Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J.

Re: Civil Misc. Review Application No. 276069 of 2012.

This review application has been filed by the petitioner for review of the order of this Court dated 27.8.2012. Sri P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents has raised a preliminary objection under Chapter IX Rule 14 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 and states that it is only the applicant who can file a review application accompanied with an affidavit which shall be made by the applicant himself.

Sri H.S.N. Tripathi, learned counsel for the review application however submitted that Chapter IX Rule 14 is not mandatory and in the present case the affidavit has been sworn by the son of the applicant.

Chapter IX Rule 14 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 reads as follows:

"14. contents of review application- An application for review on the ground of the discovery of new and important matter or evidence shall state in clear terms what such new or important matter or evidence is, the effect or purpose thereof, how the same after the exercise of the due diligence was not within the applicant's knowledge or could not be produced by him at the time when the decree was passed or order made and how and when he came to know of it or became able to produce it and the affidavit accompanying it shall be made by the applicant himself."

I have given my anxious consideration to the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties and in my opinion the provisions of Chapter IX Rule 14 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 are unambiguous and have to be read as mandatory and not simply as directory inasmuch as Chapter IX Rule 14 in clear and candid terms provides that the affidavit accompanying the review application shall be made by the applicant himself.

In this view of the matter the affidavit in the present case having been filed by one Sri Pankaj stated to be the son of the applicant Suresh, is not maintainable and is accordingly rejected.

Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

Order Date :- 2.8.2013

N Tiwari