https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396304 Conflicting appellate and revisional orders arising from the same complaint were held unsustainable because the appellate court maintained the conviction while the revisional court, in the complainant's revision, set aside the conviction and remitted the matter for sentence. The High Court noted the revisional court had overlooked the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction and proceeded on an incorrect understanding of compensation, since the trial court had not awarded it in the manner assumed. To remove the inconsistent disposal and restore orderly adjudication, both orders were set aside and the two proceedings were remanded for fresh decision in accordance with law. en-us Fri, 12 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:36:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396304 Conflicting appellate and revisional orders arising from the same complaint were held unsustainable because the appellate court maintained the conviction while the revisional court, in the complainant's revision, set aside the conviction and remitted the matter for sentence. The High Court noted the revisional court had overlooked the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction and proceeded on an incorrect understanding of compensation, since the trial court had not awarded it in the manner assumed. To remove the inconsistent disposal and restore orderly adjudication, both orders were set aside and the two proceedings were remanded for fresh decision in accordance with law. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 12 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396304