// 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2584/2008 Vinod Kumar S/o Shri Harakchand Jagetia Versus Tara Chand Rajkumar Lunawat and Others Date of Order ::: 28.08.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Jai Prakash Gupta, Counsel for petitioner #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. This writ petition is directed against the impugned order dated 28th February, 2008 whereby the trial court rejected the application of the petitioner under Order 14 Rule 5 read with Section 151 CPC. I have examined the reasons assigned by the trial court for rejecting the application in the light of submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and, after considering the same, I am of the view that there is no jurisdictional error in the impugned order so as to interfere with the same under Article 227 of the Constitution. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Yunus Vs. Mohd. Mustaqim – AIR 1984 SC 38 , held that // 2 // in exercising the supervisory power under Article 227, the High Court does not act as an Appellate Court or Tribunal. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Babhutmal Raichand Oswal Vs. Laxmibai R. Tarte – AIR 1975 SC 1297 , held that the High Court cannot, while exercising jurisdiction under Article 227, interfere with finding of fact recorded by the subordinate court or tribunal. It's function is limited to seeing that the subordinate court or tribunal functions within the limits of its authority. It cannot correct mere errors of fact by examining the evidence and re-appreciating it. There is no merit in this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed in limine. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//