ORDER

Muralee Krishna, J.

Respondents 1 and 2 in W.A. No. 2323 of 2025 filed this review petition under Order XLVII Rule 1, read with Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908, (‘CPC’, for short), pleading that there is a mistake or error apparent on the face of the record in the order dated 11.11.2025 passed by this Court in C.M. Application No.1 of 2025, which was an application filed by the 1^st respondent herein-appellant to condone the delay of 357 days in filing the appeal.

2. Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, and the learned counsel for the 1^st respondent.

3. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that the Apex Court condemned the growing tendency of litigants in throwing the entire blame on the head of the advocate and thereby disowning him at any time and seeking relief. According to the learned Senior Counsel, the affidavit of the appellant bank by itself would indicate that the bank was not diligent in prosecuting the case. This Court, while rendering the impugned order, failed to consider the precedents relied on by the review petitioners that each date of delay must be explained and such explanation must be reasonable and not an excuse. In suppor