FIRST WE FILED WP dNO 16417 TO RECALL ORDER OBTAINED BY FRAUD AS PER ESTABLISHED PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY EARLIER JUDGMENTS LIKE CHENGLVARYA NAIDU,AIR 1994 SC 853 PAPAYYA SHASTRI AIR 2007 SC 1546 WHICH  CLEARLY HAVE ESTABLISHED THAT ORDER OBTAINED BY FRAUD IS VITIATED, A NULLITY AND CAN BE RECALLED BY ANY COURT, BUT  STILL REGISTRAR  LODGED IT. APPEAL AGAINST ORDER  WAS BEFORE SAME  JUDGE WHO HAD PASSED THE ORDER BY FRAUD,IT WAS DISMISSED WITHOUT HEARING US.

BUT AS PER DEFECTS WE WERE TOLD TO FILE AN APPLICATION TO RECALL AND ACCORDINGLY WE FILED dNO 22066/18. BUT  AGAIN IT WAS LODGED AS  NOT REGISTERED & NON MAINTAINABLE BY REGISTRAR.SAME WAS APPEALED BUT PLACED BEFORE SAME JUDGE WHO REJECTED IT AS BEING 2ND REVIEW IN GARB OF RECALL APPLN, DESPITE PRESENTING THAT GROUND OF FRAUD WAS NOT AGITATED EARLIER AND IN CASE OF FRAUD EVEN 2ND REVIEW APPLN  HAS BEEN ALLOWED EARLIER BY HONBLE COURT. STILL DISMISSED.

WE R FILING REVIEW AGAINST THE DISMISSAL. FOR NOT TAKING NOTE OF MAINTAINABILITY OF APPLICATION TO RECALL, ORDER BEING NON EXECUTABLE FOR BEING AGAINST DEAD PERSON, AND DEPRIVING PETITIONER OF RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY CONSTITUTION, “A.R. Antulay Appellant v. R.S. Nayak and another Respondent.” AIR 1988 SUPREME COURT 1531 SUPREME COURT,