Back
SUVRA GHOSH, RAI CHATTOPADHYAY
Shahla Khokhar – Appellant
Versus
State Bank of Mysore – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant sought review of order (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. applicant claims error in judgment (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. applicant's medical leave rejection (Para 6) |
| 4. court's findings on absence (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. court's ruling on review scope (Para 21 , 23) |
| 6. review application dismissed (Para 22) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The applicant/appellant/writ petitioner, has sought review of the order of the Hon’ble Division Bench dated October 18, 2023, in appeal No. FMA 1175 of 2019.
3. The applicant has pleaded that there has been gross and manifest error apparent on the face of the order of the Hon’ble Division Bench dated October 18, 2023, for which this Court may invoke its power of review of its own order and interfere into the same.
5. It has further been submitted that the Court held erroneously that after rejection of medical leave of the applicant and the prayer for reimbursement of the medical bills on March 15, 2014, the applicant chose not to join duty. The applicant has submitted that since subsequently on April 18, 2015, the bank authorities directed her to submit leave letters with medical reports, the incident which happened on Ma
The power of review is limited to correcting errors apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to reargue the merits of a case.
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.
Point of Law : Practice and Procedure - Review/modification and/or setting aside of order - Orders of transfer and posting - It is well settled that scope of review of an order is very limited and it....
The scope of review is limited to considering only an error apparent on the face of the record. A review cannot be used as a tool for changing the opinion/view of the court, and it is essential that ....
Review petitions must demonstrate an error apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to reargue the case or substitute a new view.
The legal review process is constrained to errors apparent on the record, and cannot be used to challenge substantive issues decided in an earlier ruling.
A review of a judgment is permissible only on specific grounds such as error apparent on the face of the record or discovery of new evidence, and cannot be used to reargue the case or introduce new c....
A review petition must show an apparent error on the record to succeed, as delay does not extinguish the right to continuing benefits like family pensions.
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
