- (1.) D. S. Sinha, J. Heard Shri S. K. Chaubey, learned counsel appearing for Shri Lalmani Tewari, son of Shri Anant Prasad, the deceased petitioner No. 2. at great length and in detail. Shir A. S. Kapoor, learned counsel representing the respon dents, has also been heard. .
(2.) THE circumstances of the case render it imperative to go into details of the undisputed sequence of events which are as under : Cause of action for the writ petition wherein this application has been moved arose out of the proceedings under Section 9 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953. THE writ petition was instituted in this court in July, 1985 through Shri D. V. Jaiswal, Advocate. Alongwith Shri D. V Jaiswal, Shri K. M. Dayal, learned Senior Advocate of this court also appeared in the petition. THE petition was ad mitted on 15lh July, 1985. After a lapse of the long period of about eight years, an application dated 14th October, 1993 was moved on behalf of the petitioners sug gesting the dismissal of the petition as abated in view of the fact that the village wherein the property in dispute was situated had been denotified bringing an end to the consolidation proceedings. The Application dated 14-10-1993 was up for consideration before the court on 12th April, 1994. After hearing Shri Ram Singh, holding brief of Shri Atul Dayal, another counsel of the petitioners, the petition was dismissed and the interim order was directed to stand discharged in view of the application dated 14th October, 1993. Thereafter, an application dated 4th May, 1994 purporting to be a review application under Order XLVII read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil proce dure, 1908 was moved through another counsel Shri V. B. L. Srivastava, this applica tion was not supported by any affidavit, though under Rules of the Court, 1952, it was required to be so supported. However, the application remained pending for one reason or the other, recorded on the order-sheet.
(3.) ON 19th April, 1995 Shri R. M. Pandey, brief holder of Shri V. B. L. Srivas-tava, appeared and obtained a week's time to file requisite affidavit in support of the review application. On 4th May, 1995, the office submitted a report that no affidavit was filed for which the time was granted by the Court on 19th April, 1995.;