Hariom S/O Chaganlal Jaipuriya vs Manoj Ganpatlal Chamedia And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 12980 Bom

268.MCA.1089.2015.                                                                                             1/2


                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

                   Miscellaneous Civil Application (Review) No.1089/2015
                                              IN
                              Second Appeal No.33/2013 (D)
                Hariom s/o Chaganlal Jaipuriya Vs. Manoj Ganpatlal Chamedia & Anr.
*******************************************************************************************************************
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders                               Court's or Judge's Orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.
*******************************************************************************************************************
                 Shri P.D. Meghe, Advocate for the Appellant.
                 Shri A.K. Choube, Advocate h/f Shri Akshay Naik, Advocate for Respondent No.1.

                 CORAM : S.M. MODAK, J.

DATE : 9th SEPTEMBER, 2021.

Learned Advocate Shri Meghe for the appellant apprised me about the matter. There is a lacuna in the operative order passed by the trial Court on 11th October, 2000. There is neither the word "dismissal" nor the word "decree". However, while answering the issue No.8 "whether the suit is false and frivolous" the trial Court has held in the affirmative.

02] As a result, plaintiff filed first appeal. The first appeal was dismissed on 14th August, 2012. As a result, Second Appeal No.33/2013 is filed by the appellant/plaintiff. It was allowed and the judgment passed by both the Courts below were set aside. It was delivered on 4th September, 2015.

03] Now, it is the turn of respondent No.1. By this application he is seeking review of the judgment dated 4 th September, 2015 passed by this Court. While admitting the review application, the Court has made observations about the grievance of the appellant on 14th March, 2016.

268.MCA.1089.2015. 2/2

04] There is a request for adjournment on behalf of the respondent No.1. In view of that, matter be kept on 16 th September, 2021. It is made clear that no adjournment will be granted on that date as this matter was already heard before my learned Predecessor.

JUDGE

vijay