"If a person has first applied under Rule 90 to set aside the sale, then, unless he withdraws his application, he is not entitled to make an application under Rule 89. The application even if made will be deemed to have been made only on withdrawal of the previous application. - withdrawal is complete as soon as the plaintiff intimates the Court .
reported in
1975 (1) SCC 405
Equivalent citations:
AIR 1975 SC 957, 1975 SCR (3) 526
has held that withdrawal is not dependent on the order of the Court. The act of withdrawal is complete as soon as the plaintiff intimates the Court that he wants to withdraw the Suit
it was held that if a person first applied under Rule to set aside the sale, then, unless he withdraw his application, he was not entitled to make and prosecute an application under Rule 89 and that such application, even if made, would be deemed to have been made only on withdrawal of the previous application under Rule 90. In paragraph 9 at page 408 (of SCC) = (at p. 959 of AIR) of the Report, the following observations are pertinent:-
"If a person has first applied under Rule 90 to set aside the sale, then, unless he withdraws his application, he is not entitled to make and prosecute an application under Rule 89. The application even if made will be deemed to have been made only on withdrawal of the previous application
Comments
Post a Comment