(J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ.)
G. Sita Ram Chander ________________________________ Appellant;
v.
Tummala Suresh Chandra Chatterjee _________________ Respondent.
Civil Appeal Nos. 10204-10214 of 2026 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 9910-20 of 2025)§, decided on August 5, 2026
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
Leave granted.
2. We are called upon to consider an order passed in a batch of review petitions and a consequential judgment passed in the appeals. Admittedly, the appeals filed by the respondents were dismissed and review petitions were filed against the dismissal, which was heard by yet another learned Single Judge, and were allowed.
3. On a brief pursual of the order, we are persuaded to find that the review, in fact, was considered as an appeal. The learned Single Judge reheard the matter, evident from the finding that the judgment under review had not considered the contentions of the review petitioners which had substantial bearing on the result of the case. The order passed is quite beyond the contours of a review jurisdiction.
4. We also notice that on the very same day of the common order in the review, a common judgment was also passed allowing the appeals, finding no reason to post the case for further hearing, since the merits were argued in the review petitions.
5. We find no reason to sustain the common order in the review petitions, and we set aside the same. The common order allowing the appeals, after the reviews were allowed, which are also impugned in the present appeals, also stands set aside as a dependent order.
6. Insofar as the original order passed in the appeals, we give liberty to the aggrieved parties, the respondents herein, to challenge the same within a period of 60 days from today, if they so desire.
7. We make it clear that we have not made any observations on the merits of the matter.
8. The appeals stand allowed only to the above extent.
9. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
———
§ 2026 INSC 906
