Judgment S.N.Hussain, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This application is being filed for review of orders dated 8.4.2004/ 27.4.2004 by which civil revision No. 11.83/02 was disposed of with certain directions. 3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the last sentence of the order dated 8.4.2004 passed in civil revision No. 1183/2002 which reads as follows :- - "It may be made clear that this order will not affect in any manner the order dated 11.6.2001 passed by the 3rd Additional District Judge, Arrah, in Misc. Appeal No. 79/2000." 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had already filed a petition for review of the order dated 11.6.2001 passed in Misc. Appeal No. 79/2000, which is pending before the 3rd Additional District Judge, Arrah, and the aforesaid observation may affect the result of that application. 5. This civil revision had arisen out of Title Suit No. 121/2000 in which the plaintiff-petitioner filed a petition under Order XXXIX, Rule 2, CPC for restraining Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 from cancelling the plaintiffs licence, which was dismissed by the learned trial Court on 17.11.2000 against which the plaintiff-petitioner filed Misc. Appeal No. 79/2000 which was disposed of on 11.6.2001 by the learned 3rd Additional District Judge, Arrah with specific directions. Since the aforesaid directions were not complied with, the plaintiff filed a petition under Order XXXIX, Rule 2(A), CPC bearing Misc. Case No. 6/2001 for taking action against the parties concerned for non- compliance of the Courts order. In the said Misc. Case the learned second Additional District Judge Arrah, directed the opposite parties to appear and file show-cause as to why they should not be punished for disobeying of the Courts order dated 11.6.2001 passed in Misc. Appeal No. 79/2000. Against this order the said civil revision was filed. 6. At the time of hearing of the civil revision it was clear that order dated 11.6.2001 passed in Misc. Appeal No. 79/2000 was not challenged before any higher authority and hence the last portion of this Courts order was necessary so that the petitioner (Defendant No. 4) may not take any undue advantage and try to re-open the order of injunction itself. 7. Appeal No. 79/2000 was not challenged before any higher authority and hence the last portion of this Courts order was necessary so that the petitioner (Defendant No. 4) may not take any undue advantage and try to re-open the order of injunction itself. 7. So far the provision of Order XLVII, Rule 1, CPC is concerned, it is also clear that it is not applicable in the instant matter as its requirement of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence was not within his knowledge or could not be produced by him, or on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record or for any other sufficient reasons were not available to the petitioner. Further more, the mala fide intention of the petitioner (Defendant No. 4) is apparent from the record of the case as he has filed the civil revision against the order by which no lis was decided and only an interim order of filing show-cause was passed. Furthermore, even this review petition has been filed without any valid ground or review. 8. In the aforesaid circumstances, it is also quite apparent that all the proceedings before this Court are ill advised and is clearly meant to cause impediment in the judicial process and implementation of the Courts order Furthermore, the order passed in the civil revision clearly meant that the said order will neither affect the order of injunction nor will it effect any review petition, if filed, challenging the aforesaid order of injunction dated 11.6.2001 passed in Misc. Appeal No. 79/2000, and the same has to be considered on its own merit and in accordance with law. 9. In the aforesaid circumstances, I do not find any merit in the review petition and the same is dismissed, However, considering the pendency of this review case, the period of one month granted to the defendant-petitioner by order dated 8.4.2004 for filing show-cause and relevant document is enhanced to two weeks from the date of this order.