9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1251X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sition to correct the error committed by the subordinate courts by virtue of power of appeal conferred on the said court by some statute, of course subject to the exception that the error is otherwise apparent on the face of record and not an error which has to be fished out and searched. Under the guise of review, the parties are not entitled to re-hearing and this Court while exercising power of review cannot sit in appeal over its own order. Having said so, it can safely be concluded that the petitioners have failed to make out a case within the four corners of Section 114 read with Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Accordingly, we find no merit in this Review Petition and the same is dismissed - Review Petition No. 91 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de ) reads thus:- 114. Review- Subject as aforesaid, any person considering himself aggrieved- (a) by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed by this Code, but from which no appeal has been preferred, (b) by a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed by this Court, or (c) by a decision on a reference from a Court of Small Causes, may apply for a review of judgment to the Court which passed the decree or made the order, and the Court may make such order thereon as it thinks fit. Order 47 of the Code reads thus:- Review Application for review of judgment.- (1) Any person considering himself aggrieved,- (a) by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed, but from which no appeal has been pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e writ petition, wherein they admitted the time restriction for transfer to be 20 years and not 15 years, that such findings regarding embargo on transfer was recorded. Indisputably, it was the official respondents, who alone were the best authorities that could have stated about the time period of the embargo placed on the transfer. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that the Deputy Commissioner had not reviewed his order and had in fact only clarified the same. This issue has already been dealt with in detail by this Court, as is evident from paragraphs 23 to 25 of the impugned order. 7. In so far as the applicability of the provisions of the Government Grants Act to claim complete ownership is concerne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be drawn in favour of the applicant, in such circumstances, the review will lie. However, under the guise of review, the parties are not entitled to re-hearing of the same issue but the issue can be decided just by a perusal of the record and if it is manifest can be set right by reviewing the order. It must be remembered that in exercise of the powers of review this court cannot sit in appeal over its own order. Re-hearing of the matter is impermissible in law, since the power of review is an exception to the general rule that once the judgment is signed or pronounced, it should not be altered. It has to be remembered that power of review can be exercised for correction of a mistake but not to substitute a view. The review cannot be treate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner or could not be produced by him; (ii) Mistake or error apparent on the face of the record (iii) Any other sufficient reason. (B) When the review will not be maintainable:- (i) A repetition of old and overruled argument is not enough to reopen concluded adjudications. (ii) Minor mistakes of inconsequential import. (iii) Review proceedings cannot be equated with the original hearing of the case. (iv) Review is not maintainable unless the material error, manifest on the face of the order, undermines its soundness or results in miscarriage of justice. (v) A review is by no means an appeal in disguise whereby an erroneous decision is re-heard and corrected but lies only for patent error. (v) The mere possibi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew cannot be exercised on the ground that the decision is incorrect or erroneous on merit, as the same lies within the ambit of higher court having appellate power which alone is in a position to correct the error committed by the subordinate courts by virtue of power of appeal conferred on the said court by some statute, of course subject to the exception that the error is otherwise apparent on the face of record and not an error which has to be fished out and searched. Under the guise of review, the parties are not entitled to re-hearing and this Court while exercising power of review cannot sit in appeal over its own order. 11. Having said so, it can safely be concluded that the petitioners have failed to make out a case within the fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
