Chulahay Mandal And ANR. v. Most. Panchi Devi And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.13 of 2014 In SA 96 of 2011 ====================================================== Chulahay Mandal & Anr.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

Most. Panchi Devi & Ors.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Radha Raman Verma For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO ORAL ORDER 10-12-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

This review application has been filed by the petitioners for review of order dated 26.07.2013 passed by this court in Second Appeal No.96 of 2011 dismissing the second appeal under Order 41 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The learned counsel submitted that there is error apparent on the face of the record that at the time of passing the order khatian (Ext.3) was not considered and, therefore, the order requires to be reviewed.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kamlesh Verma Vs. Mayawati and others, A.I.R. 2013 SC 3301 has held that a review is by no means an appeal in disguise whereby an erroneous decision is re-heard and corrected but lies only for patent error.

Patna High Court C. REV. No.13 of 2014 (5) dt.10-12-2015 In view of the above facts and settled principles of law I do not find merit and accordingly, this review application is dismissed.

(Mungeshwar Sahoo, J) Harish/- U