https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192801 A refusal to exercise review jurisdiction after notice had already been issued under Order 44 Rule 1(2) was treated as a jurisdictional error, not a mere mistake of law, and was therefore amenable to revision under Section 115 CPC. The court reasoned that once that stage had passed, the entertainability of the pauper appeal could not be reopened, and the proper course was to proceed with the appeal on pauper footing. The order declining to do so was set aside, and the appeal was directed to be taken on file and disposed of accordingly. en-us Thu, 19 Dec 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Jun 2017 18:35:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192801 A refusal to exercise review jurisdiction after notice had already been issued under Order 44 Rule 1(2) was treated as a jurisdictional error, not a mere mistake of law, and was therefore amenable to revision under Section 115 CPC. The court reasoned that once that stage had passed, the entertainability of the pauper appeal could not be reopened, and the proper course was to proceed with the appeal on pauper footing. The order declining to do so was set aside, and the appeal was directed to be taken on file and disposed of accordingly. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 19 Dec 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192801