Ramkinkar Sing Deo vs Collector, Nuapada & Ors

M.C.NO.13 OF 2018

Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

This is an Application for condonation of delay in filing the present Review Petition.

Advancing his submission, Mr.C.A.Rao, learned senior counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Review Petition involves brought on Record of this Court by virtue of the direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in disposal of Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.9325/2013 on 8.3.2013.

There is no dispute that the Review Petition was filed on 16.4.2013. Through Paragraphs-2 & 3 of the present Misc. Case, there is request for condonation of delay on the ground that first of all, there was delay in obtaining the certified copy of the judgment in Writ Appeal No.534/2011 and which course was filed subsequently on 20.8.2015. Taking this Court to the date of filing of the Limitation Petition on 21.1.2018, there is admission that there has been delay of 953 days in filing the Limitation Petition. There was no dispute at the Bar, in the event the Review Petition does not accompany the Limitation Petition, the limitation period stretches to the date of filing of the Limitation Petition. Learned senior counsel for the Petitioner while also submitting that there is in fact no delay as there is no time stipulation in the Hon’ble Supreme Court order requests this Court to condone the delay accordingly.

Mr.R.K.Mohanty, learned senior counsel for the contesting private O.Ps., on the other hand, resisted entertaining such Limitation Petition on the ground that once the Hon’ble Supreme Court gave liberty to a Party to bring Review Petition before the High Court, the Party benefited by such direction is duty-bound to bring the Review Petition within reasonable time. Further looking to the narrations in Paragraphs-2 & 3 of the Limitation, there is admission of delay of 953 days, even there is delay in filing the certified copy of the judgment required to be interfered with in the Review Petition. In the above background, Mr.Mohanty, learned senior counsel resisted entertaining such Petition.

Mr.S.P.Panda, learned Additional Government Advocate adopted the submission of Mr.R.K.Mohanty, learned senior counsel for the contesting private O.Ps. and also prayed for dismissal of the Limitation Petition.

This Court here finds, the background involving filing of the Review Petition appears to be dependent on the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in disposal of Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.9325/2013 on 8.3.2013, which order reads as follows :-

“Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioners and perused the relevant material.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner on the date of passing of the impugned order the sole appellant therein was no more and he died on 19,.2.2012. If the above statement is correct, the petitioners are free to approach the High Court by way of filing a review petition.

With the above observation, the special leave petition is disposed of.”

Undisputedly, the Review Petition was filed on 16.4.2013 but it was not a proper application for non-filing of certified copy of the judgment passed in the Writ Appeal appearing to be impugned in the Review Petition. and even though a submission is made by the learned senior counsel for the Petitioner, there was no direction by the Hon’ble Supreme Court to approach the High Court by way of Review Petition within time frame, and therefore, there is no delay in fact, this Court observes, even though there is no direction for filing Review Petition in time frame but for the clear provision in bringing a proper petition at least within one month of the date of order under the provision of the Civil Procedure Code, this Court finds, there is inordinate delay. However, considering that the Petitioner had difficulty in getting the certified copy of the judgment passed in Writ Appeal No.534/2011 being obtained by the Petitioner and was filed ultimately on 20.8.2015, nothing prevented the Petitioner to file the Limitation Petition at least on this date. The Petitioner waited almost three years to bring the Limitation Petition. For the settled position of law, unless the Limitation Petition is accompanied with the Review Petition, the Limitation stretches to the date of filing of the Limitation Petition. As a consequence, this Court finds, there has been inordinate delay of 953 days in presenting the Review Petition ultimately.

It is at this stage, this Court takes into account the reason of permission to the Petitioner to file the Review Petition in this Court involving the Writ Appeal Judgement appears to be involving inherent defects in the disposal of Writ Appeal No.534/2011, admittedly in pendency of a substitution petition in Writ Appeal, vide Misc. Case No.187/2012 appears to have been filed on 22.3.2012 and the judgment against a dead man passed in Writ Appeal No.534/2011 on 13.12.2012.

In the circumstance, this Court finds, the delay should be condoned but however keeping in view the suffering of the contesting private O.Ps., this Court feels it appropriate to impose cost of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) to be paid to the private O.Ps. through their Counsel within ten days from today, failing which the Review Petition shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench.

Provided the cost is paid and receipt is filed, the Review Petition will be listed for consideration of the Review Petition involved by this Bench on 7th December, 2022..

..................................................