Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.87 seconds)
Sh. Rajiv Kumar Virmani vs Union Of India Through on 27 April, 2015 cites

Shivdeo Singh & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 8 February, 1961

It is true as observed by this Court in Shivdeo Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1963 SC 1909, there is nothing in Article 226 of the Constitution to preclude a High Court from exercising the power of review which is inherent in every Court of plenary jurisdiction to prevent miscarriage of justice or to correct grave and palpable errors committed by it. But, there are definitive limits to the exercise of the power of review. The power of review may be exercised on the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence was not within the knowledge of the person seeking the review or could not be produced by him at the time when the order was made; it may be exercised where some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record is found; it may also be exercised on any analogous ground. But, it may not be exercised on the ground that the decision was erroneous on merits. That would be the province of a Court of appeal.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 564 - Full Document

Ajit Kumar Rath vs State Of Orissa & Ors on 2 November, 1999

A power of review is not to be confused with appellate power which may enable an Appellate Court to correct all matters or errors committed by the Subordinate Court. 3.1 Similarly in the case of Ajit Kumar Rath Vs. State of Orissa and Others, AIR 2000 SC 85 the Apex Court reiterated that power of review vested in the Tribunal is similar to the one conferred upon a Civil Court and held:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 676 - S S Ahmad - Full Document

Gopal Singh vs State Cadre Forest Officers ... on 15 May, 2007

Any other attempt, except an attempt to correct an apparent error or an attempt not based on any ground set out in Order 47, would amount to an abuse of the liberty given to the Tribunal under the Act to review its judgment. [Emphasis added] 3.2 In the case of Gopal Singh Vs. State Cadre Forest Officers Assn. and Others [2007 (9) SCC 369], the Apex Court held that after rejecting the original application filed by the appellant, there was no justification for the Tribunal to review its order and allow the revision of the appellant. Some of the observations made in that judgment are extracted below:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 212 - V S Sirpurkar - Full Document
1