Page No.# 1/4 GAHC020000862026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : Review.Pet./1/2026 SBI GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. HAVING ITS REGISTRED AND HEAD OFFICE AT MUMBAI ASAF ALI ROAD AND REGIONAL OFFICE AT KOLKATA AND BRANCH OFFICE AT GUWAHATI ASSAM AND DIVISIONAL OFFICE AT JORHAT ASSAM VERSUS SHRI JONGPONGTOSHI AND 5 ORS R/O LONGSA VILLAGE HOUSE NO. 762 POLICE STATION - MOKOKCHUNG NAGALAND 2:MISS TEMSUSANGLA D/O SHRI JONGPONGTOSHI R/O LONGSA VILLAGE HOUSE NO. 762 P-S MOKOKCHUNG NAGALAND. 3:SMTI. NUNGSHIYANGLA D/O JONGPONGTOSHI R/O LONGSA VILLAGE HOUSE NO. 762 P.S. MOKOKCHUNG NAGALAND MOKOKCHUNG 4:MR. LANUYANGER D/O JONGPONGTOSHI Page No.# 2/4 R/O LONGSA VILLAGE HOUSE NO. 762 P.S. MOKOKCHUNG NAGALAND MOKOKCHUNG 5:SHRI MOYALUIN S/O SHRI LANUTEKA R/O MONGSENBAI WARD MOKOKCHUNG TOWN P.S. MOKOKCHUNG MOKOKCHUNG NAGALAND. OWNER OF VEHICLE NO. NL02C9383 6:SHRI. BENDANGTOSHI S/O LATE IMDONG R/O WARUMONG VILLAGE P.S. ALONGKIMA DISTRICT - MOKOKCHUNG NAGALAND. DRIVER OF VEHICLE NO. NL02C 9383 ------------ Advocate for : ASENLA S LKR Advocate for : I. APOK PONGENER (R/1-4) appearing for SHRI JONGPONGTOSHI AND 5 ORS BEFORE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER ORDER Date : 19-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Ms.Asenla S Lkr. The instant petition under Order 47 Rule 1 read with section 114 of the CPC has been filed praying for review of the order dated 07.08.2025 passed by this Court in I.A(Civil) 68/2025 in connection with MACApp.8/2025. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in I.A(Civil) 68/2025 there was a prayer for condonation of delay of Page No.# 3/4 94 days but the Court has dismissed the same by observing that there is no cogent explanation whatsoever regarding the delay from 26.11.2024 to 05.03.2025 and also from 07.04.2025 to 02.05.2025. The Court was also of the view that the period be- tween 26.11.2024 to 05.03.2025 and 07.04.2025 to 02.05.2025 does not concern the applicants but delay has been caused dur- ing the preparation of the appeal by the counsel. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is an incorrect conclu- sion as the delay was caused due to the preparation of appeal by the counsel and not the applicants. However the Court has wrongly come to the conclusion that the delay was caused due to the negligence of the applicants. In view of the said submissions, the learned counsel prays that the order dated 07.08.2025 in I.A(Civil) 68/2025 aris- ing out of MACApp.8/2025 may be recalled/reviewed by taking into consideration the facts as stated above. The learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 Mr. Apok Pongener submits that this review application is actu- ally an appeal in disguise as the petitioner has assailed the order dated 07.08.2025 on the ground that this Court had come to the wrong conclusion. He has submitted that the petitioner has not been able to show any grounds for this Court to exercise its re- view jurisdiction. He has submitted that review jurisdiction is very limited and the present review application should be dis- missed as no ground for review has been made out. This Court has considered the submissions of the counsels and perused the application and the pleadings thereof. Grounds for review are very limited as stated by the learned Page No.# 4/4 counsel for the respondents and it is settled law that unless there is discovery of new and important evidence which could not be produced during the hearing despite due diligence, or there is error apparent on the face of the record or other suffi- cient reason, a review application is not maintainable. In the present case it is found that there is no such new materials or evidence produced by the petitioner and the petitioner is mainly aggrieved by the finding of this Court. Accordingly, this review petition is dismissed as not maintainable. Sd/- JUDGE Comparing Assistant