Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.34 seconds)
Documents citing Bashir Khan vs Ranger, Social Vaniki And Ors. on 15 July, 1994

Gangwani And Co. vs Saraswati Wd/O Maniram Banewar on 12 April, 2001

10. Shri Gilda further argued that the Division Bench of Rajasthan High Court in the case of Bashir Khan v. Ranger Social Wanike and Ors., 1966 ACJ 115 after considering the ratio laid down in Associated Cement Companies Ltd. v. P.N. Sharma, (supra) and Yeshwantrao v. Sampat, (supra) held that the Commissioner acting under the provisions of Workmen's Compensation Act is not a Court subordinate High Court for the purpose of Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Bombay High Court Cites 37 - Cited by 5 - D D Sinha - Full Document

Gopali (Smt.) vs Bhagchand And Anr. on 25 August, 1995

2. A preliminary objection has been raised on behalf of the non-petitioners about the maintainability of the revision petition. According to him the Commissioner is not any Court subordinate to the High Court as Section 115 C.P.C. only covers the civil Courts in normal hierarchy of Courts. This matter was decided by a Full Bench of this Court in Bashir Khan v. Ranger Social Vaniki and Ors. (1995-I-LLJ-845) a question was framed by a Single Judge which was referred to a Larger Bench and while answering the question whether the Commissioner under the Workmen's Comp-ensation is a Court subordinate to the High Court and as such revision lies against the order passed by the Commissioner, it was held that revision petition under Section 115 C.P.C. was riot maintainable against the order passed by the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation as the Commissioner was not Court subordinate to the High Court for purposes of Section 115 C.P.C. However in the alternative it was prayed that the revision petition may be treated as a writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India and this prayer was allowed and the petition was decided on merits. In view of this Full Bench decision, the present revision petition is not maintainable. Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed that this may be treated as a writ petition and for this the learned counsel for the respondents have no objection. Accordingly I proceed with this petition as it was a writ petition.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 7 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Vikram Singh Verma vs Smt. Kashmiri Devi And Ors. on 8 September, 1999

7. Even the revision petition under Section 115, CPC is not maintainable against the order of Commissioner Workmen's Compensation as is held by the Division Bench of this Court in Bashir Khan v. Ranger Social Vaniki and Ors. (supra). It was indicated by the Division Bench that revision under Section 115, CPC is not maintainable against the order passed by the Commissioner Workmen's Compensation as the Commissioner was not a Court subordinate to the High Court for the purpose of Section 115, CPC.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 8 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1