Ram Sajeevan vs The Asstt. Director Of ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 22806 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 25
 

 
Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION DEFECTIVE No. - 170 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Ram Sajeevan
 
Opposite Party :- The Asstt. Director Of Consolidation, Sultanpur
 
Counsel for Applicant :- M.A. Siddiqui
 

 
Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. 

This is an application for review of the judgment dated 22.10.2019 along with an application for condonation of delay in filing the same. Earlier an application for recall of the said judgment filed on 11.02.2020, which was also delayed. The said application came to be dismissed on 1.8.2022 as not maintainable by an order which reads as under:

"(C.M. Application No.19813 of 2020-Delay)

(C.M. Application No.19814 of 2020-Recall)

Heard.

This is an application for recall of judgment and order dated 22.10.2019 along with an application for condonation of delay in filing the application for recall.

The judgment is on merit. The applicants/ petitioners were represented through a counsel who was given several opportunities to answer to the queries of the Court as is mentioned specifically in the order dated 18.10.2019 and thereafter, the matter was decided on 22.10.2019 as learned counsel for the applicants/ petitioners failed to show the law on the subject in the context of Rule 25-A of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules, 1954 as is mentioned therein.

The application for review has been filed through another counsel Sri Ram Dheeraj Yadav on 11.02.2020 along with an application for condonation of delay.

In such a case, an application for recall is not maintainable. If at all, an application for review would be maintainable. Moreover, the counsel who has filed these applications is also not present.

Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay in filing the application for recall along with an application for recall of order dated 22.10.2019 are dismissed."

Thereafter this application has been filed on 19.12.2022 with delay. The application for recall was delayed and after its dismissal this application for review along with application for condonation of delay is also delayed.

The explanation offered in the affidavit in support of the application for condonation of delay is not at all satisfactory.

Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay (C.M. Application No.1 of 2022) is rejected. Consequently, the review application is also dismissed.

Order Date :- 23.12.2022

Ram.