^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR APPLICANTS: APPELLANTS Plauitiffs ^ Re^ewPetitionNp. 1872011 1. Laxman Das S/o Saatram Das aged about 56 years, R/o Ramsagar Para, Raipur, Police Station, TahsU aad District Raipur (C.G.). 2. Shrechand S/o Ghumaalal, aged about 51 years, R/o Vitli Naka Mahasaaiund, Present R/o Ganjpara, MahasamLund, Police Statiion & TahsU and Distdct Mahasamund C.G. PPLICANTS: RESPONDENTS Defendants Versus 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Sint, Anusuiya, W/o Khuiaaolal, aged about 56 years, Jaiprakash, S/o Khomaxxlal, aged about 28 years, Naval Kishore, S/o Khomanlal, aged about 26 years, Suresh Kuniar S/o Khonianlal, aged about 39 years, AU above R/o Ward No. 15, Maiiasaniund (C.G.). Laxinichaad Chandrakar, S/o Unkown, R/o Maadi Road, Mahasaiaund, PoMce Station & Tahsil and District Mahasacaund (C.G.). APPLICATION FOR REVIBW OF ORDER DATBD 29/09/2010 PASSBD S.A. N0. 81/200'3r BYTHIS HON»BLECOURT. (SB :Hon>ble Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) /. Present;- Ms. Anju Ahuja, Advocate for the appMcants/petitioners. Non-appUcaats/respondents not noticed, ORAL- ORDER (Passedon 05/03/2011) 1. Heard on petition for review of fhe judgment dated 29/9/ 2010, 2. Leamed counsel for the petitioners submits fhat although documents were available but counsel has not filed the docunients before the trial Court or First AppeUate Court or even Second AppeUate Court aad fhereby order dated 29/9/2010 has been passed. 3, AUeged pleadiags and aUeged dociiments perused, 4, Parties are under obUgation to file docuxaent before the trial Court which they proposed to rely but as per claiai oflearaed coiinsel for the petitioners ^' -o parties has not filed documents before fhe tdal Court when fhe suit was filed ia fhe year -2004 fhen before the First Appellate Court aad even beforc fhe Second AppeUate Court, In ttiese circuinstaaces, I do not fand aay ground for reviewing fhe order dated 29/9/2010 or for condonation ofdelay. Consequently, I.A, Nos. 01 85 02 is dismissed aad rcview petition is also ^^missed. §^/. T.P. Sharma Judge ^