Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2021) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 16412 = 2021(2) L.A.R. 598
43862 of 2020
in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 35493 of 2019
Decided on: 13.08.2021
For Petitioner(s)
Mr. Rajesh Pathak, Adv. Mr. Sanjeet Trivedi, Adv. Kumari Rashmi Rani, Adv. Ms. Rashi Jaiswal, Adv.
Mr. Vipin Kumar Jai, AOR
A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Section 114, Order 47 Rule 1 – Constitution of India, Article 136 -- SLP against review order – Maintainability of -- SLP would not lie against only a review order. Yashwant Singh Negi’s case (2013) SCC online 308 relied.
(Para 5)
B. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Section 114, Order 47 Rule 1 – Constitution of India, Article 136 -- Review after 56 years 6 days -- One can find no error apparent after 50 years for the Court to exercise the jurisdiction of review – It is an abuse of process of law and complete wastage of judicial time – SLP dismissed with costs of Rs. 5000/-.
(Para 5, 6)
Cases referred:
1. Municipal Corporation of India vs. Yashwant Singh Negi, (2013) SCC online 308.
ORDER
1. Delay Condoned.
2. The impugned order was passed in a review application filed by the petitioners with a delay of 56 years and 6 days.
3. The Learned Judge had noticed that when the judgment was passed in the First Appeal at no point of time any objection was raised that respondent therein had passed away.
4. The submission was sought to be made after 56 years. The application was accordingly dismissed as was the application for condonation of delay.
5. Now the second round has begun by filing the SLP against the said order. We must point out that in any case, an SLP would not lie against only a review order in view of the judgment of this Court in Municipal Corporation of India vs. Yashwant Singh Negi, (2013) SCC online 308. Apart from this also, one can find no error apparent after 50 years for the Court to exercise the jurisdiction of review.
6. We find the present proceeding filed before this Court as also before the High Court is an abuse of process of law and complete wastage of judicial time. Looking the allegation that the petitioners are not apparently well to do, we dismiss the special leave petition with only costs of Rs. 5000/- to be deposited with the Supreme Court Advocates on Record Welfare Fund within four weeks, and restrain ourselves as otherwise the costs would have been much higher.
7. Pending application stands disposed of.
Petition dismissed.
********