learned counsel for the respondent
(petitioner in the Writ Petitions) had filed a petition to reopen the
SAIR for hearing them even with regards maintainability ... petitioner in the present Writ Petition)
filed a petition to reopen SAIR for hearing them with regards
maintainability. While the order passed
petitions to set
aside the exparte order and the petition in CMP 201/2013 to condone the delay
in filing to set aside petition which ... allowing the petition to condone the delay
of 34 days in filing the set aside exparte order petition dated 11.9.2013 and the
petition
merits in main MCOP along with the above mentioned MP viz., reopen petition simultaneously on or before 14.9.15. If, there is any need or necessity ... examination of further witness cited in the reopen petition filed by the petitioner / second respondent, this Tribunal shall pass suitable orders in the said petition
opening and listing of such review petitions which had been dismissed in chambers. Since the review petition of the convict in the present case ... Supreme Court in Mohd Arif (supra) to have his review petition reopened and heard in court. On 2 September 2014, which was the very
orders passed on the said execution
applications, the executing court reopened the execution petition and it was
restored to file. As per order ... proceedings
recording full satisfaction of the decree, can it be reopened by a petition
under Order XXI Rule 97 of the Code? Yet another question
petition.
9. Shri Sudhir Mehta, learned advocate appearing on
behalf of the respondent revenue has tried to oppose the
present petition and justify the reopening ... petition succeeds. The
impugned notice dated 30.7.2013 issued under section 148 of
the Act at Annexure A to the petition and the reopening
behalf of the appellants, the highly competent counsel has
filed petitions for reopening the appeals after posting the appeals for
orders. The same were rejected ... merits. As such, this Court opines that the
rejection of the reopen petitions filed by the appellants will not be
prejudicial to the appellants
behalf of the appellants, the highly competent counsel has
filed petitions for reopening the appeals after posting the appeals for
orders. The same were rejected ... merits. As such, this Court opines that the
rejection of the reopen petitions filed by the appellants will not be
prejudicial to the appellants
behalf of the appellants, the highly competent counsel has
filed petitions for reopening the appeals after posting the appeals for
orders. The same were rejected ... merits. As such, this Court opines that the
rejection of the reopen petitions filed by the appellants will not be
prejudicial to the appellants
behalf of the appellants, the highly competent counsel has
filed petitions for reopening the appeals after posting the appeals for
orders. The same were rejected ... merits. As such, this Court opines that the
rejection of the reopen petitions filed by the appellants will not be
prejudicial to the appellants
