Review jurisdiction under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC is strictly limited to correcting errors apparent on the face of the record or newly discovered evidence; it cannot be used as an appeal in disguise or to re-argue the merits of a settled decision.

* * *

Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)

CM-4658-CWP-2026 in RA-CW-538-2025 in CWP-13119-2022

1. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present application may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed any further with liberty to avail appropriate remedy including the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India by filing appropriate appeal.

2. Ordered accordingly

CMs-17708,17728,17701,17716,17697,17706,17722,17694,17726,17712 17710,17714,17718, 17724, 17720-CWP-2025 & CMs-2728,2719 & 2781-2026

3. Present applications have been filed in the respective review petition(s) for condonation of delay in filing the respective review petition(s).

4. Keeping in view the averments made in the applications, which are duly supported by an affidavit, the applications are allowed. Delay in filing the respective review petition(s). is condoned.

Main Review applications

5. Present bunch of review petitions have been filed for the review of order dated 25.09.2025 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court on the ground that the direction to frame the scheme could not have been given, hence, the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench is bad in law.

6. We have heard learned counsel for the applicant(s) and have gone through the record with their able assistance.

7. It is a trite position of law that the scope of review is very narrow and same can only be entertained in case any wrong fact has been made the basis for the conclusion arrived at in the order review of which is sought.

8. On being asked to point out any such wrong fact, which may have been recorded and has been made the basis for conclusion arrived at, learned counsel for the applicant(s) has not been able to point out any such incorrect fact relied upon by the Coordinate Bench while passing the order dated 25.09.2025.

9. The only argument raised is that the order dated 25.09.2025 passed by the Coordinate Bench is incorrect as no direction could have been given for framing the scheme.

10. The said argument means that the judgment is being projected to be incorrect, which aspect is not to be dealt in a review.

11. As per settled principle of law, an incorrect order can only be challenged in an appeal and not in review petition. Reliance can be placed upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal Nos.1167-1170 of 2023 titled as S. Murali Sundaram vs. Jothibai Kannan and others decided on 24.02.2023. Relevant paragraph of the said judgment is as under:-

"5.1 While considering the aforesaid issue two decisions of this Court on Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 114 CPC are required to be referred to? In the case of Perry Kansagra (supra) this Court has observed that while exercising the review jurisdiction in an application under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 114 CPC, the Review Court does not sit in appeal over its own order. It is observed that a rehearing of the matter is impermissible in law. It is further observed that review is not appeal in disguise. It is observed that power of review can be exercised for correction of a mistake but not to substitute a view. Such powers can be exercised within the limits of the statute dealing with the exercise of power. It is further observed that it is wholly unjustified and exhibits a tendency to rewrite a judgment by which the controversy has been finally decided. After considering catena of decisions on exercise of review powers and principles relating to exercise of review jurisdiction under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC this Court had summed upon as under:“

(i) Review proceedings are not by way of appeal and have to be strictly confined to the scope and ambit of Order 47 Rule 1 CPC.

(ii) Power of review may be exercised when some mistake or error appar