Review jurisdiction under the Code of Civil Procedure is limited to errors apparent on the face of the record or discovery of new evidence. It cannot be used as an appeal in disguise to re-argue merits or re-appreciate evidence already adjudicated by competent authorities.

1. The present Review Petition under Section 114 read with Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has been preferred by the Petitioners being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order dated 06.05.2025 passed by this Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 2266 of 2025, whereby the Petitioners, though directly affected and necessary parties to the lis, were neither impleaded in the proceedings nor afforded any opportunity of hearing. It is respectfully submitted that the said order has resulted in grave prejudice to the Petitioners, as it has led to initiation of coercive proceedings for demolition of their residential house constructed over the disputed land, pursuant to action proposed under Section 250 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code at the instance of Respondent No. 6. The Petitioners, being lawful owners and possessors of the subject property, are thus constrained to invoke the review jurisdiction of this Court to prevent miscarriage of justice and to secure an opportunity of being heard.

2. Facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that the Petitioners, who have been in continuous, uninterrupted, and peaceful possession of a portion of land bearing Khasra No. 277, admeasuring 286 square feet, situated at Village Paragaon, P.H. No. 45, RIC Nawapara, Tehsil Abhanpur (now Gobra Nawapara), District Raipur (Chhattisgarh), for the last 30–40 years. The said land was lawfully allotted to Petitioner No. 1 by way of a lease/Patta dated 09.09.1998 for a period of 30 years, which remains valid up to 09.09.2028. In further recognition of such lawful possession, financial assistance was granted under the Indira Awas Yojana during the year 1999–2000 to the father of Petitioner No. 2, Late Dharmu Nagarchi, for construction of a residential house over the said land. Pursuant thereto, a dwelling house was constructed and the Petitioners have since been residing therein. The Petitioners have also been regularly paying property tax, thereby reinforcing their lawful and settled possession. After an inordinate delay, Respondent No. 6, in the year 2011, initiated proceedings under Section 250 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code before the learned Naib Tehsildar, seeking dispossession of the Petitioners on the basis of a purported demarcation report dated 04.05.2011. It is submitted that the alleged demarcation was conducted on 22.04.2011 without issuance of any notice to the Petitioners and behind their back, in clear violation of principles of natural justice. Upon due consideration, the learned Naib Tehsildar, vide order dated 12.06.2019, was pleased to dismiss the application filed by Respondent No. 6 and declared the said demarcation report to be invalid. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, Respondent No. 6 preferred an appeal before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Abhanpur. The learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, vide order dated 12.02.2020 passed in R.P.C. No. 121/A-70/2018-19, allowed the appeal and directed eviction of the Petitioners and restoration of possession in favour of Respondent No. 6, without proper appreciation of the material on record, including the Petitioners’ long-standing possession and the illegality of the demarcation proceedings. The Petitioners thereafter preferred an appeal before the C