ASIM KUMAR MONDAL,J. - (1.) THIS is an application under Section 14 read with Order 47 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code praying for review of the judgement and order passed by this Court in C.O. No. 3307 of 2011 dated 29th January, 2013.
(2.) THE applicant filed one revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the award in dispute case No. 28 of 2007 passed by learned Arbitrator dated November 28, 2007 and the impugned order of the learned Cooperative Tribunal passed in Appeal No. 24 of 2008 on January 13th, 2011 rejecting the application of the petitioners for stay of operation of the said award. No affidavit -in - opposition was ever filed by the opposite parties to the said revisional application. The revisional application being C.O. No. 3307 of 2011 was finally heard by this Court and dismissed the same by a judgement and order dated 29th January, 2011. It is alleged that the said order and judgement under review was dismissed without any concern being shown for the glaring instance of trickery and fraud committed on the judicial system though asserted by applicants. It is also alleged that there are certain apparent mistake and errors in findings and observations of this Court in the judgement of the said revisional application and as such the final order drawn on the basis of such finding is also illegal, wrong and erroneous for which the said judgement and order is liable to be reviewed. It is also contended that the mistakes and errors are apparent on the face of record for which it is also not necessary to enter into any matter of controversy and as such order is liable to be reviewed. In paragraph No. 5 of the revisional application the applicants strongly averred that dispute case and award passed therein as well as the said appeal against the said award filed in the names of applicants were beyond their knowledge. It was also asserted that applicants never received even any summons of the said dispute case. It will be evident from the concocted written objection filed on behalf of the defendant No. 3 and 4 in the said dispute case with the forged signatures of applicants Nos. 1 and 2 herein. There was grievous fraud practice upon the adjudicatory authority rendering the whole award vitiated in law and a nullity.
(3.) BEING aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by this Court on January 29th, 2011 in C.O. No. 3307 of 2011 the applicants preferred the present application for review on the following grounds : - This Court was wrong in holding that the same self plea has already taken in the purported appeal pending before the learned Tribunal since from the record it is evident that applicants clearly asserted in their stay application and the connected revision application that the purported appeal No. 24 of 2008 before the learned Tribunal was filed on their forged signature and not actually by them and as such question of taking such plea in the memo of appeal did not arise. ;