Simultaneous remedies under Art 226, 227, CPC - Appeal/Rev?

Application wasn't dismissed, but application was rejected.

@ Author,


That is what happens to party-in person litigants mostly. Not to be read as a comment though but knowledge of law is more required by a in-person pleader than any other party. However, I still suggest you to approach Legal Aid Center as earlier advised by me in one of the earlier post and I don’t see what is this ego of yours coming as hurdle. In Law practice we can’t make records but we try our level best to curtail damages means we may not win all our  case since joining Bar but our efforts is to bring least damage to our clients and simultaneous aspire to bring more andmore reliefs honestly to our expanding client base is basic premises we showcause our learnings and Law is one subject whose special knowledge no one can escape it keeps evolving forever as you also better know than me by now:-).


Well I admit this word ego is intentionally used here after reading this post as I have been reading all your post since you started seeking remedies to quite a interesting legal questions till date and is purely my personal observation which you have more rights to differ in public platforms but then it is besides the point, this Art. 227 rapsody is already dismissed na and limitation period for review is also lost but then there is always a remedy as no litigant can’t be remedy less is well respected maxim………and law favors litigants means person who love litigating is favourd in Law:-) 



BTW, it is not called ‘rejection’ as HC don’t use such words they use better word such as “dismissed” and even at the time of such usage standing at bar overhearing Lordships then oral dictation, politely you could have plead “My lord allow me to withdraw” in such case effect (later invoking cause of action under S. 5 LA) would have been different to rake in fresh cause of action!. Further there is noting called simultaneous remedies that also when you are invoking COI in family law maint. related scenarios I believe your cause of action rested on maint. case is it not ! Lady this is Law and not our FB farm villa……………..[so said with respect to your stature here and sincerely wish you all the very best in your battle and impressed with your standing as always believe you will filter out quite well in days to come].

Tajobsindia,

Does procedural law specify anywhere as a precondition  that every petitioner  should be thorough in law and procedures therein?

You know what !! ....

Only JDs aren't allowed to file revision under 115,  but at the max they can file it under 227,

But there is such precedent that DH has to utilise CPC115 option first and that DH can't directly invoke 'power of superintendance' of HC.

What if the DH also has merits to invoke the same?

My question is very valid to common conscience.

I won't get scared to ask questions because of your reply.

A correction!

But there is NO such precedent that DH has to first utilise CPC115 option, before invoking directly 'power of superintendance' of HC.