The Court dismissed an application to condone a delay of 3564 days in filing a review petition. It held that a subsequent judgment is not a ground for review or condonation of delay, rejecting the argument that the petitioner was unaware of the recent decision.
Rejection of condonation of delay of 3564 days and dismissal of the review petition.
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 KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/9TH MAGHA, 1937
RP.No. 54 of 2016 () IN WA.1832/2006
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WA 1832/2006 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 10-10-2006
REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT:
P.K.BABU,
PALASSERIL HOUSE, MADAPLATHURUTH, MOOTHAKUNNAM P.O. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.VIJAYAN. K.U.
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
R2-4 BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. GIRIJA GOPAL
R1 BY SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
sou.
ASHOK BHUSHAN, CJ & A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J
R.P. No.54 of 2016 in W.A. No. 1832 of 2006 and C.M. Appln. No.25 of 2016 in R.P. No.54 of 2016
Dated this the 29th day of January, 2016
O R D E R
Shaffique, J
This is an application to condone the delay of 3564 days in filing the review petition. In paragraph 5 of the affidavit,
filed in support of the above petition, it is stated as under :
“5. It is submitted that the judgment in W.A. No.1832/2006 was pronounced on 10.10.2006 and Review Petition without delay had to be submitted on or before 9.11.2006. It is submitted that the decision in Mohamed Basheer.A vs. State of Kerala & Others 2014 (4) KHC 658 was rendered on 28.10.2014. This decision came to the notice of the counsel only on 24.12.2015. Application for certified copy of the judgment in W.A. was submitted on re-opening of the Court and received on 07.01.2016 the accompanying Review Petition could be filed only today with a delay of 3564 days. It is respectfully submitted that the delay was neither willful nor the result of any laches on my part. As I have a very meritorious matter to be presented before this Honourable Court, the delay caused in submission of Review Petition may kindly be condoned in the interest of justice.”
account of the subsequent judgment the petitioner is entitled for review of the earlier judgment.
2
R.P.No.54/16
Consequently, the review petition is also dismissed.
Sd/-
ASHOK BHUSHAN CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE
sou.30/1.
// True Copy //
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a subsequent judgment can be a ground for review or condonation of delay in a review petition.
Whether the delay of 3564 days in filing the review petition can be condoned on account of knowledge of a subsequent judgment.
Whether the application for condonation of delay in filing the review petition succeeds.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Mohamed Basheer.A vs. State of Kerala & Others 2014 (4) KHC 658Referred¶29
P.K.Babu
The Chief Engineer (HRM), KSEB Board
The Chief Engineer, P.W.D (Admn), Thiruvananthapuram
State of Kerala
The Accountant General, Thiruvananthapuram
Ashok Bhushan
A.M. Shaffique
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
