Review petition sought recall of the order dismissing a delay condonation application involving an 1833-day delay. The court held that another Division Bench's order condoning a longer delay in a different matter was not precedent and no sufficient cause was shown, and dismissed the review as not maintainable under Order 47 CPC.
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 ORISSA AT CUTTACK
RVWPET No.154 of 2025
Sudhanshu Sekhar …. Petitioners Choudhury & others
Mr. Bikram Chandra Ghadei, Advocate
-versus-
Chintamani Samal & others …. Opp. Parties
Mrs. Sarita Maharana, ASC
CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Order No.
ORDER
21.08.2025
I.A. No.182 of 2025
01.
1. In the present review petition, the petitioners are seeking recall of the order dated 06.01.2025 passed in CMAPL No.463 of 2024 whereby the CMAPL was dismissed by this Court by not condoning the delay of 1833 days. The Court found there is no sufficient cause shown by the petitioner to explain the inordinate delay of 1833 days. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.
Page 1 of 2
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners by relying upon an order dated 15.01.2025 passed in CMAPL No.430 of 2024 condoning the delay of 3494 days by imposing cost of Rs.10,000/- submits that in the present case also, the delay of 1833 days delay ought to have been condoned subject to the petitioners to terms.
3. From the record, it is forth coming as to on what grounds, the Division Bench had condoned the delay of 3494 days in that matter. Moreover, the order of the Division Bench cannot be treated as precedence for condonation of delay in absence of any sufficient cause being shown by the petitioners which indeed prevented them from filed the restoration application.
4. Hence, I am not inclined to entertain this Review petition being not falling under any grounds as contemplated under order 47 of C.P.C. Accordingly the same is dismissed.
Subhasis
(S.S. Mishra) Judge
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 21-Aug-2025 19:08:04
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the review petition satisfied grounds under Order 47 CPC to recall the dismissal of a delay condonation application for an 1833-day delay.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sudhanshu Sekhar Choudhury & others
Chintamani Samal & others
Sibo Sankar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
