KAUSHIK MITRA Vs. INDIRA GHOSH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present review application, the revisionist petitioner in CO No.3670 of 2019 has sought review of an order dated August 25, 2021 passed in the said revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) Learned counsel for the review applicant/revisionist petitioner argues that this Court proceeded on a patently erroneous premise in affirming the order impugned in the said revisional application. The basis on which this Court's order was passed, it is submitted, was that the Trial Court had, by an order previous to the impugned order, already dismissed an application for recall of the order dated December 6, 2018 passed in Money Suit No. 115 of 2018. Hence, this Court as well as the Trial Court proceeded to observe that the applicant could not reopen the said order dated December 6, 2018 afresh.

(3.) However, learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the previous order of the Trial Court, whereby the Trial Court had allowed an application for recall of the earlier order dated December 6, 2018, was only in the context of seeking a re-hearing of an application under Order XXVI Rule 4A of the Code of Civil Procedure, which was different in premises than the subsequent application, rejected by the impugned order, which had also sought for recall of the order dated December 6, 2018, but had prayed for recall of the fixation of the suit itself on the ex parte Board.