Jeyalakshmi vs J. Gajalakshmi
2021 Latest Caselaw 16077 Mad

                                                                              Rev.Appl (MD) No.37 of 2021

                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                         DATED : 6/8/2021

                                                            CORAM

                                   THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

                                                    Rev.Appl (MD) No.37 of 2021


                     Jeyalakshmi                                 ....       Petitioner

                                                                Vs

                     1. J. Gajalakshmi

                     2. R. Maheswari

                     3. J. Venugopal

                     4. J. Balaji

                     5. J. Bhuvaneswari                          ...        Respondents

                                   Review Petition has been filed under Order 47 Rule 1 r/w. Section
                     114 of Cr.P.C., to review the judgment and decree passed in A.S.(MD)
                     No.306 of 2008, dated 5/1/2021.


                                   For petitioner                ...        Mr.N.R.Murugesan




                     1/4


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                Rev.Appl (MD) No.37 of 2021




                                                            ORDER

This Review Application has been filed to review the judgment and

decree passed in A.S.(MD) No.306 of 2008, dated 5/1/2021.

2. Heard Mr.N.R.Murugesan, learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that

condition in the sale agreement has not been dealt with properly. There is a

specific condition in the sale agreement that the plaintiff has to pay the

Bank, within a stipulated period, which has not been considered by this

Court. Therefore, it is his contention that the judgment has to be reviewed.

4. Review can be ordered only when there is an error apparent on the

face of the record or if the decree was passed on some glaring mistakes and

any other discovery have been unearthed later as contemplated, under

Order 47 of Code of Civil Procedure. Review cannot be automatic.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Rev.Appl (MD) No.37 of 2021

5. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be

countenanced, for the simple reason that while deciding the appeal, this

Court took note of the nature of the conditions, governing the parties and

categorically held that the delay was only due to the failure of the

defendant to give authorisation to pay such amount to the Bank. All these

facts have been considered by this Court. Under the pretext of review

application, what is sought to be urged before this Court is only to rehear

the matter on merits once again. This Court do not find any merit in this

Review Application.

6. Accordingly, this Review Application is dismissed.

6/8/2021

mvs.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Rev.Appl (MD) No.37 of 2021

N.SATHISH KUMAR,J

mvs.

Rev.APLC (MD) No.37 of 2021

6/8/2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/