said application came up for hearing on
September 4, 2023. The learned court rejected
the said application and held that question of
recalling the order ... during
adjudication of the said application.
8. Learned advocate for the opposite
parties/landlords submits that the application
for recall was not maintainable. The petitioner
respondent to file application seeking recall of the said order and pursuant to it, the
recall application was filed. He refers to the prayer ... case, it appears that the
learned Commercial Court while hearing the recall application fast-tracked it
thereby it has led to adaptation of problematic position
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 2801 of 2024
With
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR INTERIM RELIEF) NO. 1 of 2024
In R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION ... Nileshbhai Dineshbhai Mehta and, therefore, had filed
an application on 01.03.2019. However, the said application
for recalling of the witness was rejected by impugned order
aside of the order dated 14th March, 2023
passed in the application for recall of the order dated 3rd September, 2022 as
Signature Not Verified ... only allow the application for
preponment, but shall also hear the applicant today itself qua
her application for recalling of order dated
CMAP-82/2016]
to the application for recalling of the judgment dated 01.12.2015
as preferred by the applicant, the sole ground raised by the
respondent ... reply to the application. Further, keeping into
consideration the fact that the present is an application with a
prayer to recall the order/judgment dated
learned counsel for the award-debtors that the
first recall application had already been affirmed on the previous date but had
not yet been filed ... assets and thereafter resile from such position by filing
a recall application in respect of the said order.
In any event, I do not find
right to
file written statement was closed and subsequently his application seeking
recall of the said order was dismissed vide another impugned order dated ... Judge Family
Court on 01.05.2023. On 22.07.2023, the petitioner moved an application
seeking recall of the orders dated 01.06.2022 & 01.05.2023. The application
seeking recall
petitioner vide order dated 22.07.2016. Thereafter, the petitioner moved a recall application for recall of the order dated 22.07.2016, however, the same was dismissed vide ... application for recall of the order dated 20.10.2023.
11. He further submits that during the hearing of the recall application, the court reserved its decision
case, the appellant has alleged
fraud by the respondents in his recall application, which he
bears the burden to prove ( Shanti Budhiya Vesta Patel ... deemed to be lawful. By alleging fraud in his recall
application, the appellant is effectively impugning the legality
of the compromise as proving the same
well as order dated 13.10.2023 passed on the recall application moved under Section 209 (H) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
3. Facts giving ... Revenue Code, 2006 and also moved a recall application under Section 209 (H) . The appeal was dismissed vide order dated 10.10.2023, and the recall application
