Single judge rejected a review petition seeking review of a judgment allowing an appeal, holding it barred by limitation as condonation of delay prayer was rightly rejected due to lack of diligence.
I.A. No.8732 of 2016 for condonation of delay is rejected; instant review petition is rejected.
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.
Patna High Court C. REV. No.424 of 2016
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Review No.424 of 2016 IN
MA 458 of 2013
=========================================================== Ramnandi Devi, w ife of Late Raja Ram Mahto, resident of village - Ghagia, P.S. Bihia, District - Bhojpur
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Union of India through the General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur
.... .... Respondent/s
=========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anant Kumar-1-Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha-SC For the Railway : Mr. Ramakant Prasad Varma-Advocate
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI CAV ORDER Date: 27-06-2018
Petitioner Ramnandi Devi has asked for review of the
judgment dated 26.04.2016 passed in connection with Misc. Appeal No.458 of 2013, whereby and whereunder though the appeal filed by the petitioner/ appellant was allowed, but as stated, no order relating to interest has been passed, which needs to be properly appreciated. Furthermore, I.A. No.8732 of 2016 has been filed for condonation of delay in filing the review petition of three months and four days.
Patna High Court C. REV. No.424 of 2016
2
period of 30 days for filing review petition. However, petition has been filed on 22.09.2016. From the contents of the I.A. Petition, more particularly Paras-3, 4 and 5, it is evident that first of all the learned counsel on his own applied for getting certified copy without having been instructed after such long time and then thereafter, he had informed the petitioner by writing a letter of which, there happens to be no supportive evidence.
(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J)
| Vikash/- | |
|---|---|
| AFR/NAFR | A.F.R. |
| CAV DATE | 25.04.2018 |
| UploadingDate | 27.06.2018 |
| Transmission Date |
N.A. |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether condonation of delay in filing a review petition can be granted when the applicant failed to explain the delay diligently?
Whether a review petition filed after condonation is rejected is barred by law of limitation?
Ramnandi Devi
Union of India
Aditya Kumar Trivedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
