Alagarsamy vs Suba.Karmegam
2021 Latest Caselaw 23211 Mad

                                                                             C.M.P.(MD)No.5158 of 2020


                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                   DATED : 26.11.2021

                                                        CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R.THARANI

                                             Rev.Aplc(MD)No.90 of 2021
                                                       and
                                             C.M.P.(MD)No.7879 of 2021

                 Alagarsamy                                                  ... Petitioner
                                                          Vs.

                 Suba.Karmegam                                              ... Respondent


                 Prayer: Review Application is filed under Order 47 Rule 1 r/w. Section 114
                 of C.P.C., to review the order, dated 12.08.2021, in C.R.P.(MD)No.1803 of
                 2017, on the file of this Court and to allow this Civil Revision Petition.
                                  For Petitioner        : Mr.D.Senthil
                                  For Respondent       : Mr.P.T.S.Narendravasan


                                                     ORDER

This Review Application has been filed to review the order, dated

12.08.2021, in C.R.P.(MD)No.1803 of 2017, on the file of this Court and to

allow this Civil Revision Petition.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.P.(MD)No.5158 of 2020

2. On the side of the petitioner, it is stated that an observation as if no

East - West measurement was mentioned in the sketch of the Commissioner,

was made in paragraph No.7 of the order, which is an error apparent.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court, reported in 2005-5-CTC-487 (Rajender Singh V.

Lt.Governor, Andaman & Nicobar Islands and others) is cited, wherein, it is

stated as follows:-

“High Court has got power to review its own order to prevent miscarriage of justice. Non consideration of relevant documents and error apparent on face of record are grounds on which High Court can review its own order in writ petition. Some documents which were not in possession of writ petitioner at the time of hearing were before before the High Court in review proceedings”

4. On the side of the respondent, it is stated that the petitioner is trying

to re-argue the entire issue, which is not permissible in the review petition and

is trying to drag on the matter and prayed the petition to be dismissed.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.P.(MD)No.5158 of 2020

5. A perusal of the records reveals that in paragraph No.7, this Court had

elicited the arguments put forth by the respondent and it is not the observation

of this Court. No such observation was made by this Court regarding the

measurement.

6. In the above circumstances, there is no error apparent in the order and

hence, this Review Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected

Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

26.11.2021 Ls

To

The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.P.(MD)No.5158 of 2020

R.THARANI,J.

Ls

Rev.Aplc(MD)No.90 of 2021

26.11.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis