SATYENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN, ADITYA NATH MITTAL
ANUPAM KUMAR TRIVEDI – Appellant
Versus
SESSION JUDGE LUCKNOW – Respondent
By the Court.—Heard learned counsel for the review-petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.
2. This is a petition for review of the order dated 8.12.2014. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases in Meera Bhanja (Smt.) v. Nirmala Kumari Choudhary (Smt.), (1995) 1 SCC 170 and Parsion Devi and others v. Sumitri Devi and others, (1997) 8 SCC 715, has held that the scope of review under Order 47 Rule 1 C.P.C. is very limited and this jurisdiction can be invoked only, if there is mistake or error apparent on the face of record. In the instant case, there is no error apparent on the face of record of the judgment.
3. The review petition is devoid of merits. It is accordingly dismissed.
——————
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.