Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
K.S.HEMALEKHA
Ramanjinappa R., S/o. Pujari Ramaiah – Appellant
Versus
Raja, S/o Late R. Nagaraj – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. grounds for review petition (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding appropriate ownership claim (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. issue of jurisdiction and review nature (Para 4 , 6) |
| 4. limits of review jurisdiction (Para 7 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. distinction between error apparent and merits (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. conclusion and dismissal of review (Para 13) |
ORDER :
K.S. HEMALEKHA, J.
This review petition is preferred by respondent No. 1 in RFA 1859/2024, who was the defendant No. 1 in the original suit OS No. 2279/2014 aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed in RFA 1859/2024, whereby the learned single Judge of this Court reversed the finding of the trial Court on issue No. 1 and decreed the suit in entirety, declaring the plaintiffs as absolute owners of the suit schedule property.
2. The review petitioner seeks to review the order on two grounds.
(i) that the plaintiffs never sought a declaration of absolute ownership and the Appellate Court went beyond the pleadings and granted a decree to the plaintiffs, which was unprayed. Reliance is placed upon the following decisions :
(a) Om Prakash and Others v. Ram Kumar and Others , [(1991) 1 SCC 441] (Om Prakash) to contend that a party cannot be granted a re
A review petition cannot be used to challenge the merits of a decision, focusing only on errors apparent on the face of the record.
Review Petition – Jurisdiction of High Court while exercising review cannot be exercised as an inherit power nor as Appellate Court be exercised in guise of power of review – Power of review may be e....
A review is limited to correcting apparent errors in the record, not a re-evaluation of the case, reaffirming that findings must strike readily without extensive reasoning.
Point of law: The power of review may be exercised on the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence was not within the knowledge of the person seeki....
A review petition must demonstrate an error apparent on the face of the record; it cannot be used as a means to reargue the case.
(1) Review petition cannot be entertained at behest of a Counsel or a person, who had not appeared before Court or was not party in main case.(2) Judgment cannot be reviewed in absence of error appar....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power of review may only be exercised for specific reasons such as the discovery of new evidence, mistake, or error apparent on the face o....
The appellate court's failure to address pertinent arguments submitted by the reviewing party constituted an error of law warranting the review of the judgment.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
