- (1.) THIS review application is at the instance of the petitioner who was also the petitioner in connection with C. O. No. 1478 of 2001.
(2.) BY filing the instant review application, the petitioner prayed for reviewing the order dated 26th March, 2007 passed in connection with the above mentioned C. O.
(3.) THE fact leading to filing of the Instant review application may be summed up thus : i) That the present petitioner filed one matrimonial suit against his wife who is opposite party in the instant application being matrimonial suit No. 27 of 1977 before the Learned District judge, Medinipur for decree of divorce. The present opposite party contested the said case by filing written statement wherein she denied all the allegations made in the said plaint (petition ). ii) By order dated 29th February 1980, the Learned Trial Judge dismissed the said matrimonial suit (matrimonial suit No. 27 of 1977 ). iii) Against that order, the present petitioner filed appeal being F. A no. 148 of 1982 before this Hon'ble Court. The said appeal was dismissed on 24th April 1985. iv) Thereafter the present petitioner filed one suit for restitution of conjugal right before the Learned District Judge, Medinipur which was numbered as matrimonial Suit No. 48 of 1986. The present opposite party contested the said suit. By judgment and decree dated 21st May 1987, the said suit was dismissed against the order of dismissal, the present petitioner preferred one appeal being F. A. No. 92 of 1991. By order dated 17th November 1993, the Division Bench disposed of the said appeal on consent granting decree for restitution of conjugal right. In spite of said order there was no resumption of co-habitation in between the present petitioner and the opposite party for more than one year from the date of judgment i. e. 17th November 1993. vi) Thereafter the present petitioner on the basis of incorrect advice filed another suit for restitution of conjugal right being matrimonial suit No. 50 of 1995. The present petitioner did not proceed with the said suit, as already there was decree for restitution of conjugal right. vii) After the stipulated period of one year was over and as there was no resumption of co-habitation in between the parties, the petitioner filed one matrimonial suit being matrimonial suit no. 607 of 1996 before the Learned District Judge, Medinipur for decree of divorce. It is the case of the petitioner that cause of action of the suit arose after expiry of the period of one year from the date of judgment and decree dated 17th November 1993 passed in connection with F. A No. 92 of 1991. It is the case of the present petitioner that the cause of action was totally different from the cause of action of earlier suits. The present opposite party filed one application with prayer for framing of issue regarding maintainability of the suit on the ground of res judicata. By order No. 51 dated 9th April 2001, the Learned additional District Judge disposed of the matrimonial suit being matrimonial suit No. 607 of 1996 on the ground that it is barred by res judicata and is not maintainable. However, no further order was passed. viii) Against that order the present petitioner preferred one revision being C. O. No. 1478 of 2001. The said C. O. was disposed of on march 26, 2007 and the Court came to the conclusion that the revision was not maintainable, as the order in question was appealable. ix) The present petitioner took the specific plea that there was no final order and as such it cannot be said that final order was passed by the Court below. It is to be mentioned here that the opposite party did not use any affidavit-in-opposition against the review application. ;