AI Overview...
-
Maintainability of Review Applications - The general principle is that review petitions are not maintainable when there is no apparent error or mistake in the original order, unless specific circumstances such as pending SLPs or errors are present. Several sources confirm that if an SLP (Special Leave Petition) is dismissed, the review application remains maintainable if it challenges errors in the order, especially when the review is based on subsequent pronouncements or errors apparent on the face of the record A. M. Murugesan and 6 others VS E. Palanisamy - Madras, JIA LAL KAPUR VS UOI - Delhi, Yashpal Singh VS State of Himachal Pradesh - Himachal Pradesh.
-
Effect of SLP Dismissal on Review - The dismissal of an SLP does not automatically render a review application non-maintainable. Courts have held that review can still be maintained if the order under review is pending or if errors are alleged in the judgment. However, if the order is final and no errors are apparent, review is generally not maintainable Ramvati Thr. Her S. P. A. Pradeep Kumar VS Sukhbir Singh Chauhan (Thr Lrs) - Delhi, Ashish Ranjan Lal VS Deshbandhu Gupta son of Late Mathura Prasad - Jharkhand.
-
Doctrine of Merger and Its Impact - The doctrine of merger states that when an appellate court or Supreme Court dismisses an SLP, the order merges with the previous order, potentially affecting the maintainability of subsequent review petitions. Nonetheless, some judgments clarify that the mere dismissal of SLPs does not extinguish the right to seek review if errors are alleged or if the order remains pending in some form Principal Chief Conservator of Forests VS Gupta Exports represented by its Partner M. M. Gupta - Madras.
-
Specific Circumstances for Maintainability - Review petitions are often found maintainable when filed against orders that are not final or where errors are apparent on the face of the record, especially if the SLP is pending or the order is subject to further review. Conversely, where the order is final and no errors are evident, courts tend to dismiss review petitions as not maintainable Om Prakash Steel Furnitures VS Hindi Prachar Sabha - Andhra Pradesh, JIA LAL KAPUR VS UOI - Delhi, Yashpal Singh VS State of Himachal Pradesh - Himachal Pradesh.
-
Judicial Principles and Precedents - Courts emphasize that review is an equitable remedy and should not be used as a matter of routine. The principles laid down in various judgments highlight that unless a clear mistake or error is demonstrated, review petitions are liable to be dismissed, regardless of prior SLP dismissals REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER Vs CHANDRIKA.K - Kerala, Ashish Ranjan Lal VS Deshbandhu Gupta son of Late Mathura Prasad - Jharkhand.
Analysis and Conclusion:
The maintainability of review applications after the dismissal of an SLP depends on whether the order is final, whether errors are apparent on the record, and whether the review challenges errors or pending proceedings. The general consensus is that review petitions are not maintainable when no errors are evident, especially after the SLP's dismissal, unless the order remains pending or errors are explicitly alleged. Courts consistently uphold the principle that review is an extraordinary remedy, to be granted only in cases of apparent mistakes or errors in the original order. Therefore, even when an SLP is dismissed, the review remains maintainable only if specific grounds such as errors apparent on the record or pending proceedings exist A. M. Murugesan and 6 others VS E. Palanisamy - Madras, JIA LAL KAPUR VS UOI - Delhi, Yashpal Singh VS State of Himachal Pradesh - Himachal Pradesh.
References:
- A. M. Murugesan and 6 others VS E. Palanisamy - Madras
- Om Prakash Steel Furnitures VS Hindi Prachar Sabha - Andhra Pradesh
- JIA LAL KAPUR VS UOI - Delhi
- Ramvati Thr. Her S. P. A. Pradeep Kumar VS Sukhbir Singh Chauhan (Thr Lrs) - Delhi
- Shri Ch. Jagadeesh Babu vs The Union of India - Central Administrative Tribunal
- Ashish Ranjan Lal VS Deshbandhu Gupta son of Late Mathura Prasad - Jharkhand
- REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER Vs CHANDRIKA.K - Kerala
- Yashpal Singh VS State of Himachal Pradesh - Himachal Pradesh
- Principal Chief Conservator of Forests VS Gupta Exports represented by its Partner M. M. Gupta - Madras
Search Results for "Review Maintainable Even when Slp Pending"
1998 0 Supreme(Mad) 1152 • India - Madras
S.S.SUBRAMANI
The petitioner argued that the review application was maintainable as the Supreme Court had dismissed the SLP in limine. ... Final Decision: The High Court dismissed the review application as not maintainable. ... REVIEW APPLICATION - MAINTAINABILITY - DISMISSAL OF SLP - EFFECT - ORDER OF HIGH COURT MERGES WITH ORDER OF SUPREME COURT - REVIEW ... Till such an order was passed by this Court, it was competent for the High Court to review#HL....
2010 0 Supreme(AP) 1225 • India - Andhra Pradesh
VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR
A) CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908, Order 47 Rule 1:- Review petition against the CRPs on the eviction decree is maintainable notwithstanding ... SLP is filed against the orders in CRP in so far as they are pending in view of the judgment of the apex court in Meghmalas case ... the premises in question in the eviction decree and hence the landlord not having the title in the premises is not a ground for review ... that the review petitions and the SLP cannot be simultaneou....
2016 0 Supreme(Del) 409 • India - Delhi
GITA MITTAL, I.S.MEHTA
of the judgment dated 28th September, 2004 was sought on the ground of the subsequent pronouncements - Held, review is not maintainable ... before this Court and it remains pending till the special leave petition stands dismissed, the review petition deserves to be considered ... Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 47 - Rule 1 - Review petition - Dismissal of SLP - Maintainability of - ... It is contended that the review would have been maintainable ....
2018 0 Supreme(Del) 1547 • India - Delhi
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
the order of which review was sought, was held to be not maintainable. ... always available to a party against the order of which review is sought - Error even if any in the order of which review is sought ... - SLP not maintainable - No petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India should lie against such an order - Remedy is ... Applying the said principles, the SLP preferred against the order of dismissal of review peti....
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 6366 • India - Central Administrative Tribunal
Mrs. Urmita Datta (Sen), Mr. Suchitto Kumar Das, JJ
... ... Issues: Whether the applicants' application for promotion was maintainable given the ongoing litigation and whether their ... They expressed concern about the potential lapsing of posts due to pending litigation. ... Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Promotion - Applicants sought promotion to Sub Inspector of Police (Executive) pending ... Mustafa Vs Union of India & others) pending before the Hon'ble CAT, Review Petition No.248 of 2017 (Shri P.M. Manoj Kumar & others Vs Union o....
2016 Supreme(Online)(KER) 27213 • India - High Court of Kerala
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, P.SOMARAJAN, JJ
Finding of the Court: The court found that the review petitions were maintainable despite prior SLP dismissals, as ... Issues: Whether the review petitions are maintainable post-SLP dismissal, whether substantial errors existed in the prior ... Review - Lease Cancellation - Kerala Forest Act, 1961 - Sections 22 - Review petitions dismissed as maintainable; lease cancellation ... Swamy], a Two Member Bench of the Apex Court held t....
2024 0 Supreme(Jhk) 752 • India - Jharkhand
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Review petition filed after delay of 216 days - Doctrine of merger discussed - Review not maintainable when no error apparent on ... ... ... Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the review petition was not maintainable as it did not point out any error in the previous ... ... ... Result: Review petition dismissed. ... Let us assume that the review is filed first and the delay in the SLP is condoned and the special leave petition is ultimately gr....
2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 1089 • India - High Court of Kerala
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J
Issues: Whether the judgment should be reviewed based on perceived errors or pending appeals in superior courts. ... Review - Review of Judgment - CPC Section List - This case elucidates the principles governing the power of review, emphasizing ... Final Decision: The review petition was dismissed. ... was repelled by the Apex Court in SLP(C) No.8658-8659 of 2019, a review petition filed against the judgment was entertained by the Apex Court and the same is #HL_ST....
2016 0 Supreme(HP) 1461 • India - Himachal Pradesh
MANSOOR AHMAD MIR, TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN
of maintainability/non-maintainability of a petition for review and emphasized that a review is not maintainable unless there is ... Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that a review is not maintainable unless there is a mistake or error apparent on the ... Final Decision: The petition for review was dismissed with costs of Rs.25,000/- to be paid to H.P. ... ... (ix) Review is not maintainable when the same relief sought at the time of arguing t....
2015 0 Supreme(Mad) 3123 • India - Madras
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, T.S.SIVAGNANAM
are concepts which are closely inter-linked. – No merger of decree takes place where a review application is simply dismissed (DSR ... case supra had not been doubted or diluted or whittled down as it has been observed that the doctrine of merger and the right of review ... case supra and the question really was not whether the order of dismissal of the SLPs merged with the order of dismissal of the review ... Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner in the review applications (the Department) sought to contend that tho....
Filter by Legal Phrase
