Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, A. Mohamed Abu Bucker, filed a review application under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking review of an order dated 07.12.2021 passed in W.A. No. 2745 of 2021 by the Madras High Court. The matter was called on 16.03.2026, but there was no representation for the petitioner. Consequently, the case was listed on 17.03.2026 under the caption 'For Dismissal'. On that day as well, the petitioner remained absent. The court, comprising Justice S.M. Subramaniam and Justice K. Surender, dismissed the review application for non-prosecution with no order as to costs. The judgment is brief, noting the absence of the petitioner on both dates and the lack of any representation. No legal issues were argued or decided on merits.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Review Petition - Dismissal for Non-Prosecution - Order XLVII Rule 1 r/w Section 114 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Petitioner failed to appear on two consecutive dates, leading to dismissal of review application for non-prosecution - Held that absence of representation warrants dismissal (Paras 2-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the review application should be entertained when the petitioner fails to appear on consecutive hearings.
Final Decision
Review application dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.
Law Points
- Review application dismissed for non-prosecution
- Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC
- Section 114 CPC
Case Details
2026 LawText (MAD) (03) 255
S. M. Subramaniam, K. Surender
Dr. S. Suriya (Additional Government Pleader for R1,R2,R4,R5)
The Secretary to Government, Department of Highways, Chennai; The Chief Engineer, Highways (General), Chennai; The Accountant General (A and E), Chennai; The Superintending Engineer, Highways Circle Office, Tirunelveli; The Divisional Engineer, Highways Division Office, Nagercoil
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Review application against an order in a writ appeal related to highways service matter.
Remedy Sought
Review of order dated 07.12.2021 in WA.No. 2745 of 2021.
Filing Reason
Petitioner sought review of a previous order.
Previous Decisions
Order dated 07.12.2021 in WA.No. 2745 of 2021 passed by the Madras High Court.
Issues
Whether the review application should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to petitioner's absence.
Submissions/Arguments
No representation for petitioner on both hearing dates.
Ratio Decidendi
A review application may be dismissed for non-prosecution when the petitioner fails to appear on consecutive hearings without any representation.
Judgment Excerpts
When the matter was called on 16.03.2026, there was no representation for the petitioner.
Today also, there is no representation for the petitioner. Thus, the review application is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a review application under Order XLVII Rule 1 r/w Section 114 CPC to review an order dated 07.12.2021 in WA.No. 2745 of 2021. The matter was listed on 16.03.2026 and 17.03.2026, but the petitioner remained absent on both dates, leading to dismissal.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order XLVII Rule 1, Section 114
