1. Review petition filed with unresolved defects and unexplained inordinate delay. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1999 Supreme(SC) 447
1999(9) Supreme 293
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. A.S. Anand, CJI., S.B. Majmudar, J.
Shanti Devi -Petitioner
versus
State of Haryana and Ors. -Respondents
Review Petition (C) No. ... of 1999 (RPD No. 1249 of 1999)
In
Civil Appeal No. 14608 of 1996
Decided on 7-4-1999
Important Points
A review petition cannot be granted solely on the ground that a subsequent decision of a superior court reversed or modified the question of law upon which the original judgment was based, as per the Explanation to Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Subject
Civil Law - Procedural Law
Act Referred
Headnote
(i) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908-Section 114 r/w Order 47, Rule 1-Review-Ground that judgment sought to be reviewed was overruled subsequently in another case-Not a tenable ground-Review petition dismissed. (Para 2)
(ii) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 114 - Review-Delay in filing petition-761 days delay unexplained - Petition dismissed (Para 1)
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Contention that the judgment sought to be reviewed was subsequently overruled in another case. (Para 2 )
3. Unexplained delay warrants dismissal; subsequent reversal of a legal question in another case is not a valid ground for review. (Para 1 , 2 )
4. Under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, subsequent reversal of a question of law by a superior court in another case is not a ground for review. (Para 2 )
5. Review petition dismissed on grounds of unexplained inordinate delay and merits. (Para 4 )
6. Does the subsequent reversal of a legal principle by a superior court in another case justify a review of a judgment?
No. The Explanation to Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure explicitly states that the reversal or modification of a decision on a question of law by a superior court in another case is not a ground for review. (Para 2 )
7. Can a review petition be dismissed due to unexplained delay?
Yes, a review petition is liable to be dismissed if the delay in filing is not sufficiently explained. (Para 1 , 4 )
ORDER
1. We have seen the office report dated 17-3-1999. The defects pointed out therein are not removed. The delay of 761 days is not sufficiently explained. Hence, this review petition is liable to be dismissed on that ground alone.
2. However, we have gone through the review petition and the grounds urged therein. The contention that the judgment sought to be reviewed was overruled in another case subsequently is no ground for reviewing the said decision. Explanation to Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure clearly rules out such type of review proceedings. Explanation to Order XLVII Rule 1 read as under :
"The fact that the decision on a question of law on which the judgment of the court is based has been reversed or modified by the subsequent decision of a superior court in any other case, shall not be a ground for the review of such judgment."
The same provisions by analogy usefully apply to the present proceedings.
3. Hence, even on merits the review petition is liable to fail.
4. The review petition is, therefore, dismissed both on the ground of unexplained inordinate delay as well as on merits.
(C.R.) Review Petition dismissed.
**************
Parallel Citations of other Journals :
Shanti Devi v. State of Haryana and Ors., 1999(9) Supreme 293
