GANESH RAM MEENA
Dulheram Meena S/o Shri Ramswaroop Meena – Appellant
Versus
Appolo Animal Medical Group Trust, Jamdoli – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
GANESH RAM MEENA, J.
1. Since both the review petitions arise out of the same order, hence, they are being decided by this common order.
2. The material facts for consideration of both the review petitions are that a writ petition bearing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9327/2019 was filed in the name of Apollo Animal Medical Group Trust, Jamdoli through its Founder Trustee Dr. Raj Ishwar D. Khare on 21.05.2019 with the following prayer:
Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be issued in favour of the petitioner.”
3. This Court on hearing of counsel for the petitioner issued notices of the writ petition to the respond
Rajender Kumar and Others vs. Rambhai and Others
Satyanarayan Laxminarayan Hegde vs. Mallikarjun Bhavanappa Tiruymale
Shivdeo Singh vs. State of Punjab and Others
S.R.S. Advertising and Marketing vs. Dr. Kamal Garg and Another
Union of India vs. Sandur Manganese and Iron Ores Ltd. (2013) 8 SCC 337
Moran Mar Basselios Catholicos and Another vs. Most Rev. Mar Poulose Athanastus and Others
M/s. Thungabhadra Industries Ltd. vs. The Government of Andhra Pradesh
Meera Bhanja vs. Nirmala Kumari Choudhary
Lily Thomas and Others vs. Union of India and Others
Jaipur Development Authority vs. Mahesh Sharma
Inderchand Jain (Dead) through LRs. vs. Motilal (Dead) through LRs. (2009) 14 SCC 663
Hindustan Zinc Ltd. vs. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (2019) 17 SCC 82
Haridas Das vs. Usha Rani Banik
Devaraju Pillai vs. Sellayya Pillai
Chiranjilal Shrilal Goenka vs. Jasjit Singh and Others
Aribam Tuleshwar Sharma vs. Aribam Pishak Sharmal
Amrit Bhikhaji Kale and Others vs. Kashinath Janardhan Trade and Another
The court reinforced that review petitions are not an opportunity to re-argue cases or appeal decisions already made unless clear, patent errors exist.
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....
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 : Order 47 Rule 1 CPC, which reads as Application for review of judgment.
Review jurisdiction is not an appeal; it addresses only material errors apparent on record, not new arguments or hearsay.
A review petition cannot be based on subsequent judgments or changes in law; it must demonstrate an error apparent on the face of the record or new evidence that was not previously available.
An appeal would lie against an order passed in a review of the order under Article 226 of the Constitution, even if the original order is retained, once the review petition is entertained and the add....
An appeal would lie against an order passed in a review of the order under Article 226 of the Constitution, even if the original order is retained, once the review petition is entertained and the add....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.