MALHAN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application filed under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1963") seeking condonation of delay in filing the review application, which is reported to have been filed with a delay of 1900 days i.e. about six years.

(2.) The review-applicants are co-share holders and they have preferred the instant review application under Sec. 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Chapter V Rule 12 of the Allahabad High Court Rules. The judgment under review was passed on 6/10/2016 in First Appeal Defective No. 817 of 2000 (Malhan v. State of U.P. and another). It is stated that they were not in a position to file the review as they were not aware of the legal provisions. The appeal came to be partly allowed way back in the year 2016 and the appellants-applicants were awarded compensation of Rs.297.00 per square yard. Just because in Village Kakrala, the Apex Court had determined compensation of Rs.449.00 per square yard, the applicants preferred this review application. The applicants have also stated that they could not file the review application within time due to the blockage of public transportation on account of COVID-19 guidelines.

(3.) The appeals were disposed of by the Apex Court in the year 2016. The pandemic struck India only in 2020-2021. It cannot be said as stated in Paragraph No. 8 of the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application that due to the guidelines of the Central Government and the State Government the public transportation was blocked, therefore, the applicants could not come to Allahabad to file the review. The decision in Narendra and others Vs. State of U.P. and others, (2017) 9 SCC 426, cannot be of any avail to the appellants. The delay in filing the review application is absolutely deliberate. There is no reason why the appellants, who are sixteen in number, waited for six long years.