Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
SANDIPKUMAR C.MORE, ABASAHEB D.SHINDE
Kisan Bhimrao Bakal (Patil) – Appellant
Versus
Project Director, National Highways Authority Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned counsel Mr. Manorkar for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned AGP for respondent Nos.4 to 6.
2. By this review application the applicant – original petitioner is seeking review of order dated 06.07.2022, passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.2137/2021, by which, this Court had dismissed the writ petition filed by the applicant herein. The circumstance in which this Court had passed the order under review can be summarized as follows :
2.1 The petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.2137/2021, thereby, contending that his land bearing Gut No.257, situated at Village Adgaon (Budruk), Taluka and Dist. Aurangabad, was acquired by respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein. The petitioner also contended that before passing of the award he raised an objection regarding non-mentioning of the sweet lime trees and custard apple trees correctly.
2.2 It was further contended that ultimately award came to be passed on 11.10.2017 without including the valuation of sweet lime trees and custard apple trees. The petitioner further contended that the objection raised by him in respect of fruit bear
Review jurisdiction is not an appeal; it addresses only material errors apparent on record, not new arguments or hearsay.
Review jurisdiction cannot be exercised to rehear a case or correct an erroneous decision without evidence of an error apparent on the face of the record.
Review jurisdiction is limited to errors apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to reargue the merits of a case.
The court clarified the limited scope of review and the need for parties to approach the court with 'clean hands' and emphasized the finality of judgments to maintain judicial justice.
Court can exercise its power of review only when there is an error apparent on the face of the record and an error which is to be fished out by a process of reasoning cannot be said to be an error ap....
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....
Review petitions must demonstrate clear errors or new evidence; mere dissatisfaction with prior rulings is insufficient for review.
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
