Review petitions cannot re-litigate issues or present new evidence and must focus solely on correcting palpable errors within the original decision.

ORDER :

VENKATESH NAIK T., J.

This Review Petition is filed by the petitioners seeking review of the judgment and decree passed by this Court dated 15.05.2025 in R.F.A. No.869/2024.

2. The issue involved in the present review petition is in a very narrow compass. The petitioners had filed a suit in O.S. No.337 of 2017 on the file of learned Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Nelamangala, (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial Court', for brevity) praying to declare the petitioners as the absolute owners of the property measuring 01 acre 16 guntas of land forming part of Sy.Nos.28/1 and 28/2 of Nagaruru Village, Dasanapura Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, Bengaluru. The said lands were described in Schedule-B of the plaint filed in the said suit. The suit Schedule-B property was land measuring 01 acre 16 guntas, out of which, 35 guntas was converted for non-agricultural purposes. Out of 1 acre 16 guntas of land, 1 acre 15 guntas falls in Sy.No.28/2 and only 1 gunta of land falls in Sy.No.28/1. After trial, the trial Court dismissed the suit of the petitioners, hence the petitioners preferred appeal in R.F.A.No.869 of 2024 before this Court and this Court dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioners and accordingly confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court.

3. We have heard Sri P.D. Surana, learned senior counsel representing Sri Raju S., learned counsel for the review petitioners and Sri S.S. Naganand, learned Senior counsel representing Sri Vijay Kumar Desai, learned counsel for the respondent.

4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners contended that, this Court had taken note of the Sale Deed dated 31.01.1969 executed by Sri Channagiriyappa in favour of Sri S.R. Yogananda and Smt. Vijayalakshmi vide Ex.P2 and the boundaries mentioned in the said Sale Deed are noted by this Court in para No.35 of the judgment. However, from perusal of the said Sale Deed, it clearly demonstrates that the road namely, Makali Yadalu road, is situated within Sy.No.28. Thus, from the said Sale Deed, it is clear that said road is bifurcating Sy.No.28, later the survey number was re-numbered as Sy.Nos.28/1 and 28/2 of Nagaruru village. The portion which falls towards west of Makali Yadalu road is the suit Schedule-B property. Thus, suit Schedule-B property is part and parcel of the property purchased by Sri S.R. Yogananda and Smt. Vijayalakshmi under the Sale Deed dated 31.01.1969 as per Ex.P2. In the Sale Deed dated 13.12.1978 executed by Smt. Vijayalakshmi and Sri S.R. Yogananda in favour of Sri. B.C. Chinnappa, 08 acres and 11 guntas of land in Sy. No.28/2 of Nagaruru Village was conveyed under Ex.P3 - Sale Deed. However, a mistake had crept in the said Sale Deed, viz., the western boundary omitted was not mentioned. Thereafter, 08 acres 11 guntas of land in Sy. No.28/2 was sold by Sri B.C. Chinnappa in favour of Smt. Asha Uttam Chandani, (review petitioner No.3) as per Ex.P4 and in Ex.P4, the western boundary has been shown as 'Makali Yadalu road'. This mistake is palpable from the fact that western boundary is correctly mentioned as per Ex.P2, however, the same was not mentioned in Ex.P3 and Ex.P4. However, this Court in para No.37 of its judgment has observed as follows:-

"37.…………We have perused the boundaries depicted in Exs.P2 to P4 - Sale Deeds. It is clear that towards western side of 'B' sch