Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 21 (0.37 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 22 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 144 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Aribam Tuleshwar Sharma vs Aribam Pishak Sharma And Ors. on 25 January, 1979
17. The judgment in Aribam case [(1979) 4 SCC 389 :
Section 36 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Haridas Das vs Smt. Usha Rani Banik & Ors on 21 March, 2006
11. Before dwelling into the facts of the present case and adjudicating
upon the contentions advanced by the contesting parties, this Court deems it
fit to recall the parameters of a Court exercising its review jurisdiction. The
Apex Court in Haridas Das vs. Usha Rani Banik, (2006) 4 SCC 78, while
considering the scope and ambit of Section 114 CPC read with Order 47
Rule 1 CPC observed as under:
Meera Bhanja vs Nirmala Kumari Choudhury on 16 November, 1994
In Meera Bhanja v. Nirmala Kumari Choudhury
[(1995) 1 SCC 170 : AIR 1995 SC 455] it was held
that:
Shivdeo Singh & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 8 February, 1961
On an appeal to this Court it
was held as under : (SCC p. 390, para 3)
"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 inheres 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
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RAHUL O.M.P. (COMM) 42/2019 & O.M.P. (COMM) 43/2019 Page 18 of 32
SINGH
Signing Date:04.05.2026
19:33:29
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. A power of review is not to be confused
with appellate powers which may enable an
appellate court to correct all manner of errors
committed by the subordinate court."