Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition in Civil Appeal Due to Absence of Error Apparent on Record. Review Jurisdiction Limited to Correcting Patent Errors Under Order 47 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Not Satisfied by Grounds Presented.

  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The Supreme Court considered a review petition challenging its earlier dismissal of a Special Leave Petition. The litigation originated from Special Civil Application No. 9396 of 1997, which was dismissed by a single judge of the High Court, and that dismissal was affirmed by a Division Bench. The appellant then approached the Supreme Court through a Special Leave Petition, which was dismissed, affirming the views of the courts below. Subsequently, a review petition was filed with a delay of 44 days. The court first condoned the delay in filing the review petition. The core legal issue was whether there existed any error apparent on record that would justify interference through review jurisdiction. The appellant contended through grounds in the review petition that such error existed, while the respondent presumably opposed the review. The court analyzed the grounds presented and found they did not make out any error apparent on record. The court reasoned that review jurisdiction is limited to correcting errors apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used for re-hearing or re-appreciation of evidence. Since no such error was established, the court dismissed the review petition, thereby maintaining the finality of its earlier judgment dismissing the Special Leave Petition.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Review Jurisdiction - Error Apparent on Record - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order 47 - Review petition sought reconsideration of dismissal of Special Leave Petition - Court found grounds did not make out any error apparent on record - Held that review petition must be dismissed as no justification for interference existed (Paras 1-2).

B) Civil Procedure - Limitation - Condonation of Delay - Limitation Act, 1963 - Review petition filed with 44 days delay - Court condoned the delay in preferring the review petition - Held that delay was condoned before considering merits of review petition (Para 1).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether there was any error apparent on record justifying review of the earlier dismissal of the Special Leave Petition

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Review Petition dismissed; delay of 44 days in filing condoned

Law Points

  • Review jurisdiction
  • error apparent on record
  • condonation of delay
  • finality of judgments
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 Lawtext (SC) (3) 10

REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL)NO. OF 2022 (Arising out of Diary No. 2929 of 2022) IN SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL)NO. 19787 OF 2015

2022-03-15

[Uday Umesh Lalit J. , Ajay Rastogi J.]

P.S. PATEL

STATE BANK OF SAURASHTRA

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Review petition before Supreme Court challenging dismissal of Special Leave Petition

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought review of Supreme Court's earlier dismissal of Special Leave Petition

Filing Reason

To correct alleged error apparent on record in earlier dismissal

Previous Decisions

Special Civil Application No. 9396 of 1997 dismissed by single judge of High Court; affirmed by Division Bench; Special Leave Petition dismissed by Supreme Court

Issues

Whether there was any error apparent on record justifying review of dismissal of Special Leave Petition

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant contended through grounds in review petition that error apparent existed Respondent presumably opposed review

Ratio Decidendi

Review jurisdiction under Order 47 CPC is limited to correcting errors apparent on the face of the record; grounds presented did not make out any such error, thus review petition must be dismissed

Judgment Excerpts

Delay of 44 days in preferring Review Petition is condoned The grounds taken in the Review Petition do not make out any error apparent on record to justify interference This Review Petition is, therefore, dismissed

Procedural History

Special Civil Application No. 9396 of 1997 dismissed by single judge of High Court; affirmed by Division Bench; Special Leave Petition dismissed by Supreme Court; Review Petition filed with 44 days delay; delay condoned; Review Petition dismissed

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 47
  • Limitation Act, 1963:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition in Civil Appeal Due to Absence of Error Apparent on Record. Review Jurisdiction Limited to Correcting Patent Errors Under Order 47 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Not Satisfied by Grounds Presented.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order in Lokayukta Case, Upholds Statutory Power to Direct Preliminary Inquiry by State Agency. The Court Held That Section 20(1) of the Odisha Lokayukta Act, 2014 Permits the Lokayukta to Order a Preliminary Inqui...