VARUN RAJ BAGREE Vs. RATHINDRA NATH BANDHOPADHYAY AND ORS.
LAWS(CAL)-2016-5-213
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on May 10,2016

Varun Raj Bagree Appellant
VERSUS
Rathindra Nath Bandhopadhyay And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Sahidullah Munshi, J. - (1.) This is an application for review of a judgement and order dated 8th March, 2016 passed by us whereby we dismissed the appeal, and upheld the impugned judgement and order.
(2.) The application for review has been filed by one Varun Raj Bagri who was not a party to the suit and not a party to the appeal disposed of by us, by the judgement and order under review. The applicant for review is a member of the Bagree family. He is the son of late Krishna Kumar Bagree and grandson of late Girdhardas Bagree, who was one of the co-owners of Bhikam Chand Market.
(3.) An earlier application being GA No. 974 of 2016. APD No. 165 of 2002 for review of the judgment/order was dismissed by us by our order dated 12th April, 2016. This Court found - "In course of hearing of the suit as also the appeal it had been argued that there was no formal deed of conveyance executed in favour of Gopal Das Bagree at the time when the deed of partnership had been constituted. This aspect has been dealt with in the appellate judgement of which review has been sought. Furthermore, it is not understood how the executor to the Will of Gopal Das Bagri can argue that Gopal Das Bagri had no right to bring the property into the stock of the partnership firm because ownership could never pass to him in the absence of formal deed of conveyance. It might have been understandable if this issue had been raised by other members of the joint family to whom the property would necessarily revert if the property were held not to have been validly conveyed to Gopal Das Bagri. Be that as it may, rightly or wrongly this aspect has been dealt with in the judgement and order under review. Issues argued and decided in an appeal cannot be re argued by filing a review petition. It is not open to this Court to rehear an appeal under the garb of review of its final judgement and order. We do not find any grounds of review. If the applicant for review is aggrieved by our order his remedy lies by way of an appeal to a higher forum and not in making an application for review.";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.