IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Delay Condonation Application No. 13504 of 2011 In Review Application No. 991 of 2011 In Appeal from Order No. 301 of 2008 Godhan Singh Jalal & another. ………. Appellants Versus Sri Kishan Singh Bisht. ..………. Respondent Mr. Sarvesh Agarwal, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Rajesh Joshi, Advocate for the respondent / review applicant. Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble U.C. Dhyani, J. Delay Condonation Application No. 13504 of 2011: We have considered the averments made in the Application for condonation of delay in preferring the Review Application and, being satisfied with the reasons furnished for the delay, we allow the same and condone the delay in preferring the Review Application. Review Application No. 991 of 2011: Custody in the instant case was refused to the review applicant, inasmuch as, the review applicant was, then, facing the charge of having done away with his wife. Custody was, accordingly, given to the maternal grand father and grand mother of the child. In the present Review Application, it has been stated that the review applicant has since been exonerated of the charge of having done away with his wife and that is the reason for reviewing the order. 2. The Application is thoroughly misconceived and suggests that the same has been filed on the basis of advice not worth waste paper. Subsequent to the passing of the order, if situation has altered paving the way for the review applicant obtaining custody of the child, in law, the review applicant should have been advised to apply for the same and not to file the present utterly misconceived Review Application. 2 3. We, accordingly, dismiss the Review Application with cost of Rs. 20,000/- to be deposited with the State Legal Services Authority within a period of two months. In default, the same shall be executed as a decree of the Court by the Registry. 4. The operation of the direction, as above pertaining to cost, shall not be effective in the event learned counsel for the review applicant files an affidavit in Court within seven days from today stating that, in future, he will not advise a client to file such review applications, inasmuch as, he submitted that it was his mistake to advise his client to file such a Review Application. (U.C. Dhyani, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C. J.) 26.12.2011 26.12.2011 G