A power to review cannot be exercised as an appellate power and has to be strictly confined to the scope and ambit of Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC. An error on the face of record must be such an error which, mere looking at the record should strike and it should not require any long-drawn process of reasoning on the points where there may conceivably be two opinions. The judgment dated 10.08.2021 duly perused, reflects that all the grounds taken in the review have been discussed in detail and findings returned not accepting the claim of the Review Petitioner. Each and every argument having been considered by this Court in its judgment dated 10.08.2021, the arguments advanced if accepted would result in expressing a different opinion on the points raised and decided, which we are afraid do not fall within the settled contours of Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC relating to error apparent on the face of record.
[Arun Dev Upadhyaya v. Integrated Sales Service Ltd., (2023) 8 SCC 11]
Case Comment:
That in the present case, the Review Petition has been filed on the ground that there is a mistake or error apparent on the face of the Order dated 10-08-2021 passed by the Supreme Court. The Bench interpreted the power of review as follows:
- As per Order 47 Rule 1 CPC (Application for review of judgment), one of the conditions in which the power of review can be exercised is a mistake or error apparent on the face of record.
- An error which is not self-evident and has to be detected by a process of reasoning, can hardly be said to be an error apparent on the face of the record justifying the Court to exercise its power of review.
- Further, the power to review may not be exercised on the ground that decision was erroneous on merits as the same would be the domain of the Court of appeal.
- A review petition cannot be allowed to be treated as an appeal in disguise.
Subscribe to our updates now and be the first to know about the latest news and developments. Subscribe here: https://relegal.in/subscribe/