This Court dismissed the review petition filed with a delay of 547 days. The Court held that the delay was not condonable as the petitioner was duly represented during earlier proceedings and claimed knowledge of the case.
Application for condonation of delay dismissed; review application dismissed.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Review Petition No. 1/2021
Shailendra Garg S/o Late Sh. B.s. Garg, R/o Pratap Nursery, Lal Kothi, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
Sharad Bansal S/o Sh. S.k. Bansal, R/o House No. 3,houseno. 3, Chetak Marg, J.l.n. Marg, Jaipur (Raj.)
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shailendra Garg petitioner in person For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Order
24/02/2021
This review petition has been filed which is time barred by 547 days. The petitioner who has filed this review petition through counsel is now appearing in person. Hence, the petitionerapplicant submits that he was in jail from May, 2019 to July, 2020. He further submits that thereafter on account of lockdown, he could not file this review petition. The applicant submits that he had put an amount with the company and the order was deserved to be reviewed.
I have considered the submissions.
This Court finds that the applicant though in jail was duly represented by counsels who have argued the company appeal preferred by him and after detailed arguments, the judgment was reserved and was later on pronounced. Submissions on behalf of the applicant have been recorded in the detailed order. It cannot
(2 of 2) [CRW-1/2021]
thus be said that the applicant who had preferred the company appeal and had engaged a lawyer was not having knowledge of the case. The application for condonation of delay of 547 days is thus found to be without basis and the same is accordingly dismissed. Therefore, the review application is also dismissed.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J
NITIN /46
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the review petition filed after 547 days delay can be condoned despite the petitioner's imprisonment and subsequent lockdown?
Shailendra Garg
Sharad Bansal
Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
