Uttarakhand High Court
SA/108/2019 on 9 April, 2021
Office Notes, reports,
orders or proceedings
qSL.
Date or directions and COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
Registrar's order with
Signatures
SA No.108 of 2019
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
Mr. Siddhartha Singh, Advocate for the
appellants.
This second appeal was decided on its own
merits by this Court by the judgment of 31.07.2019,
whereby the second appeal, which was preferred by
the defendant/appellant was dismissed holding his
status as to be licensee. The finding has been
recorded in para 21 of the said judgment:-
"21. Hence, after going through the records,
this Court is of the view that the Second
Appeal is concluded by the concurrent
finding of facts pertaining to the title of the
property, in question and the right of the
defendants/ appellants as a licencee to
continue to occupy the same in the capacity
of the licensee stood terminated, hence, it
does not call for any interference by this
Court in exercise of its Second Appellate
power under Section 100 of the C.P.C. Thus,
the Second Appeal lacks merit and is
dismissed accordingly."
This judgment of 31.07.2019 was put to
challenge by the defendants/appellants, herein
before the Hon'ble Apex Court in a SLP No.30757
of 2019 and the Hon'ble Apex Court, vide its
judgment dated 01.10.2020 has passed the
following judgment:-
"We are not inclined to interfere with the
judgment and order passed by the High
Court.
The special leave petitioner is,
accordingly, dismissed. However, time upto
30th June, 2021 is granted to vacate the suit
premises subject to filing usual undertaking
in the Registry of this Court within a period
of four weeks from today.
Pending application stands disposed
of."
Considering the said judgment, as to be a
judgment of dismissal of the SLP as to be a
dismissal in limine, the present review application
has been filed along with the delay condonation
application.
As far as the interpretation given to the said
judgment of 01.10.2020, which had been rendered
by the Hon'ble Apex Court is concerned, I am of
the view that since the reasoning given in the
judgment of 01.10.2020, will not amount to be the
dismissal of the SLP in limine, as against the
judgment of this Court dated 31.07.2019, which
was rendered in Second Appeal No.108 of 2019,
Smt. Anita and others vs. Anup Kumar and others,
for the reason being that the Hon'ble Apex Court,
has directed the appellants herein to vacate the
premises, within the time period as it has been
provided therein by the Hon'ble Apex Court, I am
of the view that as soon as the Hon'ble Apex Court
has provided time to vacate, which was otherwise
not the observation, reasoning or finding, which has
been recorded in the judgment of 31.07.2019, the
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court, would not be
treated as to be a dismissal in limine because the
Hon'ble Apex Court has added a relief to appellant
for the purposes to enable her to vacate the
premises.
Hence, the Review Application No.10453 of
2021, is not tenable and accordingly the same is
dismissed.
(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.)
09.04.2021
Arti
