Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, RAJESH KUMAR
Avinash Kumar, S/o-Sri T.N. Thakur – Appellant
Versus
Anvil Cables Private Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The instant review petition has been filed for review of the order dated 08.04.2024 passed in W.P.(T) No.5475 of 2023 to the extent by which cost of Rs.5 lakhs has been directed to be transmitted in favour of the writ petitioner, private respondent herein, which is to be recovered from the Managing Director, JBVNL.
2. The brief facts of the case leading to filing of the instant review, needs to be referred as under:-
(i) The writ Petitioner-Firm (respondent herein) registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in the business of providing comprehensive engineering, procurement and construction services to the Core sector industries in India. The writ Petitioner-Firm has challenged the action of the Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (JBVNL) in deducting Rs. 2,90,32,000/- from the running account bills raised against the supply of materials.
(ii) The Petitioner-Firm was selected for the rural electrification works under Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Gram Jyoti Yojna in XIIth Plan for Giridih, Bokaro and Dhanbad. Later, the JBVNL issued the Letters of Award, vide (i) Letter of Award for supply of materials being, LoA No. 01/RE dated 5th February 2016, LoA No. 03/RE dated 5t
The court affirmed that unjust retention of funds violates fundamental principles of justice, and review jurisdiction is limited to specific grounds, not allowing for re-argument of previously decide....
Review petitions are limited to errors apparent on the record and cannot serve as an appeal to reargue previously decided matters.
The court established that withholding TDS without depositing it with the Income Tax Department is illegal and constitutes unjust enrichment, emphasizing the statutory duty of the deductor to comply ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the review process cannot be used to re-open settled issues or seek re-hearing of the original petition. It also emphasizes the limited scope ....
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.
The court established that costs imposed by a Tribunal can be reviewed and set aside if compliance with the Tribunal's orders is demonstrated and the affected party does not insist on the payment.
The court reinforced that review petitions are not an opportunity to re-argue cases or appeal decisions already made unless clear, patent errors exist.
The power of review is limited to correcting apparent errors on the record and cannot be used to rehash arguments or findings that have been previously settled.
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
