Chandra Bhushan Singh And ANR. v. M/S Premier Synthetic And ORS.

Patna High Court C. REV. No.139 of 2014 (8) dt.23-09-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.139 of 2014 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8219 of 2011 ====================================================== Chandra Bhushan Singh & Anr.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

M/s Premier Synthetic & Ors.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhinay Raj For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO ORAL ORDER 23-09-2015 This review application has been listed under the heading to be mentioned at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioners. It may be mentioned here that this review application was disposed of along with Civil Review No.138 of 2014.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in Civil Review No.138 of 2014 arising out of CWJC No.8427 of 2011, the evidence of the defendant was closed on 04.03.2011 whereas the evidence of the defendant in the present Civil Review No.139 of 2014 arising out of CWJC No.8219 of 2011 was closed on 03.03.2011 and this date has not been mentioned in paragraph 2 of the order while disposing of both the review applications. So far this submission of the learned counsel is concerned, there is no dispute about the date of closure of

Patna High Court C. REV. No.139 of 2014 (8) dt.23-09-2015 evidence of defendant and, therefore, it will make no difference. From perusal of the order, it appears that the review applications were allowed on the ground that these facts about the closure of evidence of the defendant were not brought to the notice of this Court while disposing of the writ application. In my opinion, therefore, it is not necessary to be incorporated in the order disposing of both the review applications. (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J) Saurabh/- U