AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
28 paragraphs · 532 wordsS.K. Mishra, J
These Review Applications have been filed and registered as MCC No. 5676 of 2021, MCC No. 5295 of 2021 and MCC No. 5311 of 2021 seeking
the review of the common order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No. 371 of 2019 and batch dated 20.05.2019, thereby
confirming the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2676 of 2018 and batch dated 04.12.2018.
Firstly, all the Review Applications are time barred. The Special Appeal was dismissed by a learned Division Bench of this Court on 20.05.2019,
and the Review Application No. 5676 of 2021 has been filed on 21.09.2021 and Review Application Nos. 5295 and 5311 of 2021 have been filed on
15.09.2021.
It is brought to our notice that since March, 2020, the continuance of limitation has been stayed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court because of the
COVID-19 pandemic. However, the review applicants have not explained the delay that has been caused between 19.05.2019 and March, 2020 i.e.
about ten months of delay has not been properly explained.
Moreover, the Review Applications are not maintainable as, firstly, a Special Leave to Appeal was preferred before Hon’ble the Supreme
Court, being SLP No. 30553-30567 of 2019, against the judgment passed by the learned Division Bench. The said SLP was dismissed on 08.01.2020,
but a liberty was granted to the review applicants for compliance of the same by the end of February, 2020. Thereafter, these Review Applications
have been filed.
It is apparent from the records that the Review Applications have been filed under Order 47, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
(hereinafter referred to as “the Codeâ€, for brevity). In order to maintain the Review Applications, the review applicants must satisfy this Court
about certain important aspects. It is appropriate to take note of the fact that an application for review of a decree or order, from which an appeal is
allowed, can be filed, maintained and allowed if it is shown : (i) that there has been discovery of new and important matters or evidence, which after
the exercise of due diligence was not within the knowledge, or could not be produced by the appellant at the time when the decree or order was
passed; (ii) on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record; and (iii) for any other sufficient reason, the order/judgment passed
may require review.
In this case, the review applicants have singularly failed to plead and establish any grounds, as enshrined in Order 47, Rule 1 of the Code to bring
the order passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court in exercise of its Intra-Court appellate jurisdiction within the ambit of Rule 1 of Order 47
of the Code. So, this Court is of the opinion that there is absolutely no merit in these Review Applications, in addition to those being barred by
limitation.
Therefore, all these Review Applications are, hereby, dismissed.
Consequently, all the Delay Condonation Applications are, hereby, rejected.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted to the parties on proper application.