Full Judgment Text
NON REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4622 OF 2002
Bissa & Ors. ….Appellants
VERSUS
The Board of Revenue for Rajasthan
& Ors. …..Respondents
O R D E R
1. This is an appeal against the Judgment and final
th
order dated 12 of July, 2001 passed by the High
Court of Judicature of Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench,
Jaipur, whereby the Division Bench of the High
Court had dismissed the appeal filed by the
appellants and confirmed the Judgment and order
th
dated 24 of April, 2001 passed by a learned Single
Judge of the High Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No. 2328 of 1994 filed by the appellants.
1
2. It appears that a compromise decree was sought to
be set aside at the instance of one Mst. Bisso, who
was totally a stranger in the said compromise
decree. Before us, the learned counsel for the
appellants challenged the order of the Division
Bench of the High Court as well as of the learned
Single Judge on two-fold grounds. First, Mst.
Bisso, being a stranger to the compromise decree,
had no right to file an application for review of the
Judgment passed by the Court in compromise.
Secondly, the said review application was filed by
Mst. Bisso after about 13 years from the date of
passing the compromise decree. Without going
into the details, we intend to dispose of this appeal
on a very short question.
3. In the order passed by the Division Bench as well
as the learned Single Judge, the aforesaid two
aspects argued by the learned counsel for the
appellants had not at all been considered, to which,
the learned counsel for the respondent also could
2
not satisfy us. However, without going into these
questions, we set aside the order of the Division
Bench of the High Court as well as of the learned
Single Judge for the purpose of requesting the High
Court to reconsider the application for review filed
at the instance of Mst. Bisso, respondent No. 1 in
accordance with law after giving hearing to the
parties and after passing a reasoned order within
four months from the date of supply of a copy of this
order to it.
4. We make it clear that we have not gone into the
merits of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the appellants which shall be decided
by the High Court in accordance with law and in the
light of the observations made hereinabove.
5. For the reasons aforesaid, the appeal is allowed to
the extent indicated above. There will be no order
as to costs.
………………………J.
[TARUN CHATTERJEE]
3
………………………J.
[AFTAB ALAM]
NEW DELHI
OCTOBER 01, 2008.
4