Review jurisdiction under CPC is limited to apparent errors, not a rehearing on the merits of the case.

ORDER :

Muralee Krishna, J.

The 4th respondent in W.A. No.1541 of 2025 filed this review petition under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’, in short), seeking review of the judgment dated 10.09.2025, passed by this Court in that writ appeal.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the review petitioner, the learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 and the learned Senior Government Pleader.

3. The learned counsel for the review petitioner would submit that while passing the judgment, this Court has not considered Ext. R4(E) judgment dated 07.09.2023 in Cont.Case (C)No. 2418 of 2022 and Ext. R4(I) final list of valid members dated 24.08.2024 issued by the District Registrar. Non- consideration of these material documents goes to the root of the membership issue. Therefore, it is highly necessary to clarify the directions regarding membership of the society by reviewing the judgment. It is also necessary to clarify that only those members included in Ext.R4(I) shall be treated as valid members, and the Deputy Director shall not recognise any person as a member unless such induction is supported by a resolution of the general body.

4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3 submitted that apart from respondents 1 to 3, the review petitioner was also not satisfied with the order under challenge in the writ petition, and hence he filed Cont.Case (C)No.2418 of 2022. In that contempt case, it was held by the Division Bench of this Court that if the conclusion arrived at by the Deputy Director in Annexure R1(a) order therein (Ext.P16 order under challenge in W.P(C) No.5140 of 2023) is correct, it is a situation warranting an extraordinary measure. It is further held by the Division Bench that, it is open to the persons aggrieved by that order to contend that the findings rendered by the Deputy Director in the said order are incorrect and unsustainable. As the jurisdiction vested in this Court in the contempt proceedings is only to examine the question whether there is wilful disobedience of the direction issued by this Court, the Division Bench held that it may not be appropriate for this Court to examine the correctness of findings rendered in Annexure R1(a) order or take any extraordinary measure to appoint a Manager for the school. In that circumstance, the contention of the petitioner that by Ext.R4(E) judgment, this Court has granted some relief in favour of the petitioner and that was not taken into consideration by this Court while passing the impugned judgment has no merit. Similarly, the learned Senior Counsel argued that Ext.R4(I) is issued based on a resolution passed by the petitioner and others. The said order was issued on 24.08.2024, which is subsequent to Ext.P11 judgment dated 23.02.2021 in W.P.(C)No.20572 of 2017.

5. The learned Senior Government Pleader submitted that there is no error apparent on the face of the record in the judgment and this court has not decided anything on merits, in the rival claim of the parties to the writ appeal, and hence the review petition is liable to be dismissed.

6. To understand the circumstances that entitle the Court to exercise its power of review, it would be appropriate to go through the provisions concerned as well as the law on the point laid down by the judgments of the Apex Court and that of this Court. Section 114 and Order XLVII of CPC are the relevant provisions as far as the review of a judgment or order of a Court is concerned.

7. Section 114 of the CPC reads thus:

“114. Review-

Subject as aforesaid, any person considering himself aggrieved-

(a) by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed by this Code, but from which no appeal has been preferred,

(b) by a decree or or