Review in Indian Law: A Detailed Legal Insight
In the context of Indian law, the term ‘Review’ refers to a judicial re-examination of a case or decision by the same court that initially delivered the judgment. It is a procedural remedy available under specific legal frameworks to ensure justice and correct apparent errors. The power of review is a vital aspect of judicial functions, helping prevent miscarriage of justice due to inadvertent mistakes.
What is a Review in Law?
The concept of review enables a court to reconsider its judgment or order on account of an error apparent on the face of the record, new evidence, or any other sufficient reason. It differs from appeal or revision, which are remedies taken to a higher court.
In India, the power of review is both constitutional and statutory. Under Article 137 of the Constitution of India, the Supreme Court has the authority to review its own judgments. Similarly, Section 114 and Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 empower civil courts to review their own decisions.
Legal Provisions Governing Review
1. Constitutional Provision – Article 137
Article 137 of the Constitution states:
“Subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament or any rules made under Article 145, the Supreme Court shall have power to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it.”
This means the Supreme Court can reconsider and modify its earlier judgments to uphold justice.
2. Statutory Provisions – Section 114 CPC and Order XLVII Rule 1
Section 114 of CPC reads:
“Subject as aforesaid, any person considering himself aggrieved—
(a) by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed, but from which no appeal has been preferred,
(b) by a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed, or
(c) by a decision on a reference from a Court of Small Causes,may apply for a review of judgment to the court which passed the decree or made the order.”
Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC elaborates the grounds on which a review can be filed:
- Discovery of new and important matter or evidence
- Mistake or error apparent on the face of the record
- Any other sufficient reason
Grounds for Review
A review petition can be entertained only on specific grounds:
- Error Apparent on the Face of the Record – A clear mistake that does not require extensive reasoning or debate.
- Discovery of New Evidence – Evidence which was not available despite due diligence.
- Other Sufficient Reasons – Any other reason considered just and equitable by the court.
These conditions aim to strike a balance between finality of judgment and justice delivery.
Who Can File a Review Petition?
Any aggrieved person who has suffered due to a judicial error can file a review petition. However, only the same court that passed the original judgment can entertain the review application.
For example:
- A civil court can review its decree under CPC.
- The Supreme Court or High Court can review their own decisions under Article 137 or Article 226 respectively.
Time Limit for Filing Review
The Limitation Act, 1963, prescribes the time frame for review applications:
- 30 days from the date of the decree or order.
Delays beyond this period require a condonation of delay application with justifiable reasons.
Review vs Appeal vs Revision
| Aspect | Review | Appeal | Revision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Filed Before | Same Court | Higher Court | Higher Court |
| Purpose | Correct own mistake | Challenge decision on merits | Rectify jurisdictional errors |
| Nature | Re-examination | Re-hearing | Supervisory control |
| Legal Provision | Article 137, Sec 114 CPC | CPC (Sec 96, 100) | Sec 115 CPC |
Important Case Laws on Review
1. Northern India Caterers v. Lt. Governor of Delhi (1980)
The Supreme Court held that a review is not an appeal in disguise. The court must exercise this power sparingly and only when error is self-evident.
2. Sow Chandra Kante v. Sheikh Habib (1975)
It was emphasized that “a mere repetition of old and overruled arguments is not sufficient ground for review.”
3. Kamlesh Verma v. Mayawati (2013)
Reiterated that review jurisdiction is strictly limited to patent errors and new evidence not available earlier.
Limitations of Review
- Not a right but a discretionary remedy.
- Cannot be used as a second chance to reargue the case.
- Review cannot be used to reopen conclusions on facts and law already settled.