Sunita Devi v. Ram Chalitra Mahton

For the Petitioners: Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Jha, Advocate 3

06.03.2009 …. I.A. No. 1284 of 2009: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. For the reasons stated interlocutory application, I.A. No. 1284 of 2009 is allowed and the delay in filing the present civil revision application is hereby condoned. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners upon the civil revision application. The applicants/objectors-petitioners aggrieved by the order dated 22.07.2008 passed by the Munsif II, Begusarai in Miscellaneous Case No. 15 of 2007, 4 whereby the petition filed by them for review/recall of order dated 27.09.2007 passed by the court below has been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners, who are 79 in number, filed a petition before the court below objecting the execution of the judgment and decree passed by this Court in Second Appeal No. 321 of 1992 on the ground that the part of property, which was involved in the suit also belongs to them and, thus, a prayer had been made for staying the delivery of possession. However, according to the petitioners, during the course of Miscellaneous Case No. 15 of 2007 order had been passed for delivery of possession over the disputed land, which had already been effected, and subsequently, the Miscellaneous Case No. 15 of 2007 aforesaid was refused to be admitted on 27.09.2007. The said order has not been challenged by the petitioners, but on 07.11.2007 a petition was filed under Section 114(a) read with section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure for review of the same. By the impugned order dated 22.07.2009 the review petition has been dismissed by the court below. In the opinion of this Court, is no 5 jurisdictional error in the impugned order. As a result, this civil revision application is dismissed. SC ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)