BANSIDHAR SHARMA (SINCE DECEASED) REP BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS – CIV. APPL NO(S). 8400 OF 2019 – Justice MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR. J & Justice AJAY RASTOGI –05.11.2019.
SECTION 144 C.P.C
While considering the scope of post 1976 amended Section 144 CPC, Hon’ble Supreme court after citing its previous judgments Neelathupara Kummi Seethi Koya Phangal (Dead) by LRs vs. Montharapalla Padippua Attakoya & Ors – 1995 Supp (3) SCC 760; and Murti Bhawani Mata Mandir Rep. through Pujari Ganeshi Lal (D) Through LR Kailash vs. Rajesh – 2019(3) SCC 707 has held as follows:
It clearly transpires that Section 144 applies to a situation where a decree or order is varied or reversed in appeal, revision or any other proceeding or is set aside or modified in any suit instituted for the purpose. The principle of doctrine of restitution is that on the reversal of a decree, the law imposes an obligation on the party to the suit who received the benefit of the decree to make restitution to the other party for what he has lost. This obligation arises automatically on the reversal or modification of the decree and necessarily carries with it the right to restitution of all that has been done under the decree which has been set aside or an order is varied or reversed and the Court in making restitution is bound to restore the parties, so far as they can be restored, to the same position as they were in at the time when the Court by its action had displaced them.
