Patna High CourtC. REV./176/2016dismissed

M/S Sudarshan Housing And Finance Ltd. And ANR v. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner And ORS

2017-04-12Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh,Mr. Justice Ashwani Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.176 of 2016 ===========================================================

1. M/s Sudarshan Housing and Finance Ltd. represented through its Director, Sri Sudarshan Kumar Bansal, Abhisek Plaza, Exhibition Road, Patna- 800001.

2. Sri Rajesh Goyal, Director, M/s Sudarshan Housing and Finance Ltd., Abhisek Plaza, Exhibition Road, Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Ministry of Labour, Govt. of India, Regional Office, Bhavishyanidhi Bhawan, R Block, Road No.6, Patna-800001.

2. The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Ministry of Labour, Govt. of India, Regional Office, Bhavishyanidhi Bhawan, R Block, Road No.6, Patna-800001.

3. The Recovery Officer, Office of the Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Ministry of Labour, Govt. of India, Regional Office, Bhavishyanidhi Bhawan, R Block, Road No.6, Patna-800001. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Krishna Chandra, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Prashant Sinha, Adv. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH) Date: 12-04-2017 This review application has been filed on behalf of the petitioners for review of the order dated 12.08.2014 passed in L.P.A. No. 887 of 2013 whereby the L.P.A. preferred by the petitioners has been dismissed by the Division Bench.

The petitioners have tried to take us to the pleadings made in the writ application as well as the Letters Patent Appeal to highlight that an erroneous order has been passed by this Court ignoring certain facts.

Patna High Court C. REV. No.176 of 2016 dt.12-04-2017 2/2 3.

In our considered opinion, this is not the scope of either Section 114 or Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. A review is by no means an appeal in disguise whereby an erroneous decision is reheard and corrected but lies only for patent error. We do not find any patent error in the order under review. 4.

In that view of the matter, we find no merit in this application. It is accordingly dismissed.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Pradeep/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 17-04-2017 Transmission Date