send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Claim your free MCQ
Please specify
Sorry for the inconvenience but we’re performing some maintenance at the moment. Website can be slow during this phase..
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
Type your modal answer and submitt for approval
A landlord loses his case in the High Court, which upturns the judgments of the courts below ordering eviction of his tenant on account of sub-letting. After reading the judgment of the High Court in details, the landlord found that the High Court had misinterpreted several judgments of the Hon’ble Spreme Court of India, due to which he is advised to file a review petition in the High Court pointing out an error apparent on record. The tenant however raises an objection on the maintainability of review petition under the Haryana Rent Act, by citing the provision of section 14 thereof, where the orders attaining finality could not be reopened. Moreover, he contends that a review petition is a statutory remedy, and the Haryana Rent Act nowhere provides the remedy of review, hence the review was not maintainable. In the light of this situation, discuss the maintainability of the review petition in the High Court. (10 Marks)
By: Abhipedia ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources