Back
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Ashish Ranjan Lal – Appellant
Versus
Deshbandhu Gupta son of Late Mathura Prasad – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
2. This Civil Review application has been filed for reviewing the judgment dated 05.01.2023 in S.A. No.207 of 2014 whereby the said second appeal was dismissed.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the Second Appeal No.207 of 2014 was dismissed by this Court vide judgment dated 05.01.2023 and thereafter the petitioner filed the Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.17813 of 2023 which was dismissed by order dated 21.07.2023. He further submits that after the dismissal of the SLP, the present civil review was filed with a delay of 216 days and I.A. No.10729 of 2023 has been filed for condonation of delay. He then submits that Hon’ble the Supreme Court has dismissed the SLP in limine and in view of that the Supreme Court has not decided the matter on merit as such, the civil review petition is maintainable as in view of the doctrine of merger of the orders, the order of this Court passed in Second Appeal is not merged with the SLP. He submits that in view of that the case of the petitioner is covered in the light of the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Khoday Di
A review petition cannot be used to reargue a case on merits and must point out an error apparent on the record; otherwise, it is not maintainable.
A review application cannot be entertained after the dismissal of a Special Appeal without prior leave, reaffirming the doctrine of merger and judicial discipline.
Special Leave Petition – Only after issue of maintainability is decided upon, can Supreme Court enter into merits of case – No appeal by way of Special Leave Petition against order passed in review i....
A party cannot re-litigate previously decided matters in a Special Leave Petition unless specific leave is granted, reinforcing the principle of finality in judicial decisions.
“unavoidable” and “unspoken” circumstances cannot be taken shelter of to claim condonation of delay in approaching the Courts. In fact the course adopted by the State in preferring the review petitio....
A review application cannot be entertained after the dismissal of a Special Leave to Appeal by the Supreme Court, as it constitutes an abuse of judicial process.
Delay in review petition condoned under Section 14 Limitation Act, excluding time in bona fide Letters Patent Appeal against Article 227 order dismissed for non-maintainability. Review dismissed for ....
The State must provide satisfactory reasons for delay in filing petitions; bureaucratic inefficiency is no excuse. Condonation of delay should not undermine the principles of timely justice.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
