Prayer: Petition filed under Order 47 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC r/w section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order, dated 20.06.2016 passed in CRP(MD)Nos.727 and 728 of 2011.
These applications have been filed against the common order, dated 20.06.2016 passed in CRP(MD)Nos.727 and 728 of 2011.
2.The applicants herein are the defendants in the suits O.S.Nos.909 of 2002 and 912 of 2002 filed for specific performance. Due to their non participation in the trial proceedings, ex-parte decrees came to be passed in both the suits by the II Additional Sub Court, Trichirapalli. The applicants filed interlocutory applications for condonation of delay of 1427 days in filing petition to set aside the decree. The trial court having not accepted the explanation subscribed by the applicants dismissed them, which was also confirmed by this court in the above civil revision petitions.
3.The learned counsel for the applicants, by placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2015(6) Scale 551 [M/s.GMG Engineering Industries & others vs. M/s.Issa Green Power Solution & others] and the order passed by this court in CRP (NPD) No.776 of 2005, dated 02.03.2017 submitted that the court has to adopt liberal approach in considering the application for condonation of delay.
4.Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the applicants cannot be permitted to argue the revisions again and there is no error apparent on the face of the records, so both the review applications have to be dismissed.
5.Heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record.
6.While dismissing the civil revisions, this court has followed the guidelines enunciated in the case of Esha Bhattacharjee vs. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur, Nafar Academy and others [2013(5) CTC 547. It is settled law that the review application is not rehearing the case and under the guise of review application, the parties cannot be permitted to argue the revision again.
7.It is to be noted here that the counsel for the applicants except submitting that the applications require liberal consideration, is not able to point out any error on the face of records.
8.In the light of the above facts, I do not find any merit in the review applications and accordingly, both the applications are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
.