Rajdeep Rastogi vs Prescribed Authority/Addl. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 25220 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:59450
 
Court No. - 17
 
Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION No. - 110 of 2023
 
Applicant :- Rajdeep Rastogi
 
Opposite Party :- Prescribed Authority / Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division) Court No. 21, Lucknow And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Krishna Srivastava
 

 
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

1. Heard Sri Vijay Krishna Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant.

2. By means of the present application review of the judgment and order of this Court dated 10.8.2023 has been sought by the applicant.

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there is factual errors in paragraph 4 of the said judgment where it is stated that written statement was filed sometime in 2018 by the petitioner opposing the claim of the petitioner-landlord. He submits that the petitioner was, in fact, substituted in place of his father Narayan Das and he stepped into his shoes. The facts, as have been stated, are not incorrect as it is undisputed that the petitioner stepped into the shoes of the original tenant on his death.

4. It is further stated that the judgment relied upon by this Court in the case of Mahesh Kumar another Vs. Swami Dayal Katiyar (Writ A No.5387 of 2018) has not been considered in its proper perspective requiring re-hearing and re-examination of the issue. He further submits that this Court has also not appreciated the provisions of Order XIX Rule 1 CPC as well as Section 155 of the Evidence Act.

5. It is noticed that all the arguments made by the petitioner have been duly considered and there is no error apparent on the face of the record as submitted by learned counsel for the applicant. A perusal of the application indicates that the applicant desires rehearing of the entire controversy on facts as well as on law, which is not permissible under the limited power of review. In view of the above, this Court does not find any merit in the application for review which is accordingly rejected.

(Alok Mathur, J.)

Order Date :- 18.9.2023

RKM.