Oral consent recorded by court valid; review order recalling earlier consent order was set aside.

Oral consent expressly recorded by the Court was valid, and the absence of written consent was not a legally sustainable ground to review and recall the earlier consent order. The SC held that the impugned review order could not stand because the recorded oral consent of counsel bound the parties. The review order was set aside and the earlier order dated 26 April 2024 was restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order passed in review, recalling the earlier consent order on the ground that consent was not given in writing, was sustainable.

Analysis: The earlier order had expressly recorded the oral consent of the respondents' counsel. Oral consent given and recorded by the Court is valid, and the absence of written consent was not a legally sustainable basis to review and recall the earlier order. The impugned review order was therefore unsustainable.

Conclusion: The review order was set aside and the order dated 26 April 2024 was restored. The appeal succeeded.

---