Allowance of a review petition filed under Section 114 r/w Order 47 Rule 1 CPC with a delay of 1305 days. The court dismissed the petition as it was defective in law and lacked merits, holding it was merely a rehearing.
The review petition and I.A-1/2019 were dismissed accordingly.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.DESAI
R.P.No.100026/2019 IN M.F.A.No.23007/2013 C/w. M.F.A.No.23316/2013
BETWEEN :
(BY SRI VITTHAL S. TELI, ADV.)
AND :
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114 R/W ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REIVEW THE
JUDGMENT DATED 19.08.2015 PASSED IN MFA No.23316/2013 C/W 23007/2013 BY THIS HON’BLE COURT AND THIS REVIEW PETITION BE ALLOWED BY REVIEWING THE COSTS THROUGH OUT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE, THIS DAY, S. SUJATHA, J ., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
This review petition is filed by the petitioner on 15.04.2019 seeking review of the order dated 19.08.2015 passed in MFA No.23007/2013 connected with MFA No.23316/2013.
petitioner and perused the records.
appeal in disguise; review is not maintainable
unless the material error is manifest on the face of the order. The grounds now urged by the petitioner to seek review of the order is nothing but rehearing of the matter. Even if any error which has to be fished-out and searched making a rowing enquiry could not be considered as an error apparent on the face of the record to review the order. Mere disagreement with the view of the judgment cannot be the ground for invoking the review petition. We do not find any ground to review the order as sought for.
There is an inordinate delay of 1305 days in filing the review petition which is not satisfactorily explained. Hence, we dismiss the I.A-1/2019 since the review petition is devoid of merits as well.
Both the I.A-1/2019 and review petition stand
dismissed accordingly.
(Sd/-) JUDGE
(Sd/-) JUDGE
NC.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the review petition is maintainable considering the inordinate delay of 1305 days and lack of apparent error on the face of the record.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SATISH S/O SURESH
UMESH LAXMAN KADDEGAL
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
S. SUJATHA
P.N. DESAI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
