Allahabad High Court
M/S Theme Engineering Services Pvt. ... vs National Highways Authority Of India, ... on 9 May, 2025
Author: Sangeeta Chandra
Bench: Sangeeta Chandra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:27505-DB Court No. - 9 Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION DEFECTIVE No. - 28 of 2025 Applicant :- M/S Theme Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. With M/S Ishita Info Solutions Thru. Mr. Sumeet Asthana Opposite Party :- National Highways Authority Of India, New Delhi Thru. Its Chairman And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amrendra Nath Tripathi,Aviral Singh Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.
(C. M. Application No. 1 of 2025) We have heard Sri Prashant Chandra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Anshuman Singh, learned counsel for the review applicant. The review application has been filed with a delay of 82 days.
We have gone through the affidavit filed in support of application for condonation of delay wherein it has been stated that the order under review was challenged in S.L.P. No. 286 of 2024 which was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 10.12.2024. A certified copy of the order was received by the applicant on 07.01.2025 and legal opinion was sought, it took some time to draft the review application, thereafter, and the delay in approaching this Court is bonafide and unintentional and hence liable to be condoned. We are satisfied with the explanation given for approaching this Court with delay.
We condone the delay.
The Review Application shall be treated to have been filed in time.
Order on review application This review application has been filed praying for review of our order dated 23.10.2024 on various grounds. We have heard Sri Prashant Chandra, learned Senior Advocate and Sri Brian Dasilva, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Anshuman Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the review applicant for quite some time and the counsel for the review applicant have tried to point out error apparent on the face of the record of this Court's order. We have gone through the paragraphs of the order under review as pointed out by the learned Senior Advocates. We do not find any error apparent on the face of the record.
We are of the considered opinion that the review applicant wishes this Court to rehear the matter which cannot be done in limited review jurisdiction. Accordingly, the review application stands rejected.
Order Date :- 9.5.2025 Darpan Sharma