9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 47 Rule of the CPC - we do not find any merit in the review petition to allow - review petition dismissed. - RP No. 249 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 2-9-2016 - P. K. Jaiswal And Vivek Rusia, JJ. ORDER 1. The petitioner has filed the present review petition seeking review of the order dated 29.04.2016, by which four writ petitions filed by the petitioner, pertaining to different part of assessment were dismissed. The petition is supported with an application for condonation of delay. There is a delay of 116 days in filing the present review petition. 2. Considering the averments made in the application, delay in filing the present review petition is condoned. 3. Heard on the question of admission. 4. The petitioner is seeking r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot rectified within the period specified in Sub- Section 1, the application shall be entitled to have the order in accordance that is application and accordingly, the Commissioner shall rectify the order within one calendar year. The petitioner has argued that the revisional authority did not decided the application within time, therefore, he has right to get the order rectified according to the application submitted by him. By way of rectification, the petitioner was in fact claiming that is bill of all loading be exhibited as a proof of export. 7. This Court has come to the conclusion that application for rectification filed by the petitioner is nothing but in the nature of appeal or revision, therefore, to reject the contention of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ramed under Article 145. The provision of sub-clause (c) of Rule 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that the court may make such order thereon, as it thinks fit, but the power is to be exercised in accordance with provisions contained in Order XLVII Rule 1, which provides as under: 1. Application for review of judgment.-(1) Any person aggrieved, (a) by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed, but from which not appeal has been preferred. (b) by a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed, or (c) by a decision on a reference from a Court of Small Caused, and who, from the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence, was not within his knowledge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de or where the Court has overlooked some obvious facts on the basis of which, a decision could be made. It is also a fact that the review is not an appeal or not even a re-hearing of the case. The points, which have been considered and adjudicated upon by the Court, cannot form the basis of the review unless one of the three conditions gets fulfilled. In the case of West Bengal Ors. Vs. Kamalsengupta Anr. [2008(8) SCC 612], the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- In Parsion Devi and Others Vs. Sumitri Devi and Others [1997 (8) SCC 715], it was held as under:- Under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC as judgment may be open to review inter alia if there is a mistake or an error apparent on the face of the record. An error which i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ition through different counsel of old and overruled arguments, a second trip over ineffectually covered ground or minor mistakes of inconsequential import are obviously insufficient. The very strict need for compliance with these factors is the rationale behind the insistence of counsel's certificate which should not be routine affair or a habitual step. It is neither fairness to the Court which decided nor awareness of the precious public time lost what with a huge backlog of dockets waiting in the queue for disposal, for counsel to issue easy certificates for entertainment of review and fight over again the same battle which has been fought and lost. The Bench and the Bar, we are sure, are jointly concerned in the conservation of jud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
