- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:1762 RP No. 17 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REVIEW PETITION NO. 17 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI LAKSHMI NARASIMHA.S SON OF S.R.SRINIVASA IYENGAR, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, RETIRED JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER, KSRTC CENTRAL OFFICE, R/A NO.10, KABADI RESIDENCY GROUND FLOOR, 9TH MAIN, 9TH BLOCK, VINAYAKA HOUSE BUILDING, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LAYOUT (VHBCS), NAGARBHAVI II STAGE. BENGALURU-560 072. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.N.MOHAN., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. H.P.GANGESH GOWDA., ADVOCATE) AND: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT HOUSE, K.H.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027. …RESPONDENT THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47, RULE 1, READ WITH SECTION 114 OF THE CPC, 1908. THIS REVIEW PETITION IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1762 RP No. 17 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Sri.K.N.Mohan., counsel on behalf of Sri.H.P.Gangesh Gowda., for the review petitioner has appeared in person. 2. The review petition is filed to review the order passed by this Court on the 15th day of July, 2024 in W.P.No.4131/2024. 3. Counsel Sri.K.N.Mohan., submits that there is a delay of 146 days in filing the review petition. Accordingly, an application is filed in I.A.No.1/2025 to condone delay of 146 days in filing the review petition. Counsel therefore, submits that he may be heard. 4. Heard the arguments and perused the petition papers, application and the affidavit with care. 5. The petitioner has sworn to a declaration of facts in the form of an affidavit. He has stated that he is undergoing dialysis twice a week for his kidney ailment and hence, he could not give instructions to his counsel to file the review petition and he was able to visit his advocate's office only during first week of January 2025 and took steps to file the review petition. Hence, there is a delay. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1762 RP No. 17 of 2025 6. Suffice it to note that this Court disposed of W.P.No.4131/2024 on the 15th day of July 2024. The limitation for an application to review a judgment is thirty days. There is an inordinate delay in filing the review petition. The reasons accorded to condone the delay are not satisfactory. The review petitioner has not made out any grounds to condone the delay. I decline to condone the delay. The application is rejected. Consequently, the Review Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 3 Sl No.: 17