Review under Section 114 and Order 47 of the CPC
In this article, we are going to discuss the topic relating to the review under section 114 and order 47 of the CPC; its meaning, its objects, its grounds, who may file, etc..
As per the general rule, once the judgment signed and pronounced by the court it becomes functus officio, (case to have control over the matter) and it cannot be altered or changed. The provision of Section 114 and Order 47 are relating to a review or the exception of the general rule.
The code provides the substantive right of the review under section 114 and the procedure thereof under Order 47. As a substantive right, it has to be conferred by the law, either expressly or by necessary implication. As a procedural provision, every Court or Tribunal can correct an inadvertent error which can be corrected ex debito justitae (to prevent the abuse of process of court).
Meaning of review:-
As per the black law dictionary, review means to reconsider, to look again or to re-examine. But in the legal parlance, it is a judicial re-examination of the case by the same court and by the same judge. In certain circumstances, a judge reviews an earlier order passed by him, called review.
Object of review:-
Actually, the doctrine of review is the acceptance of human fallibility. The main object of review is, if there is an error due to human failing, define that mistakes or error to prevent the miscarriage of justice and to defeat justice. Because justice is above all.
Who may apply?:-
Section 114 says that any person aggrieved by a degree or order may apply for a review of a judgment. Here, “person aggrieved” means the person who has suffered legal grievance or against whom a decision has been pronounced which has wrongfully deprived him of something or wrongfully refused him something or wrongfully affected his title to something.
The power of review can be exercised by the court on an application by the aggrieved person, not by the suo motu action.
Grounds for review:-
There are many grounds on which an application for review of a judgment may be made which are as follows:-
- Discovery of new and important matter or evidence; or
- Mistake or error apparent on the face of the record; or
- Any other sufficient reason.
Let us consider the above-stated Grounds in detail:-
1. Discovery of new and important matter or evidence Order 47 Rule 1:-
The first ground for an application of review is the discovery of new evidence. Whenever applicant discovered new fact or important matter evidence after exercise of due diligence, was not within his knowledge or could not be produced by him at the time when the decree was passed, application of review is permissible. Such evidence or all matter must be relevant and such a character that if it had been given in it might possibly have altered the judgment.
2. Mistake Apparent on the face of record:-
The second ground for review is a mistake or an error apparent on the face of the record. Such error may be one of fact or of law. Mistakes can be said to be an error apparent on the face of record if it is not self-evident and requires an examination or argument to establish it. There are some examples of error apparent on the face of the record; pronouncement of judgment without taking into consideration the fact that the law was amended retrospectively; considering the statutory provisions, or on the ground of omission to try a material issue in the case, etc.
3. Other sufficient reason:-
The last ground for review is “any other sufficient ground”, but actually it has not been defined in the code. However, relying on the judgment of the Privy Council and the Federal Court, the Supreme Court has held that the word “any other sufficient reason” must mean “a reason sufficient on grounds, at least analogous to those specified in the rule”.
There are some examples of other sufficient reason for granting review; where the statement in the judgment is not correct; or where the decree or order has been passed under a misapprehension of the true state circumstances; or where a party had no notice or fair opportunity to produce his evidence etc.
When a review petition lies?; Circumstances:-
There are some cases where a review petition is maintainable which are as follows:-
- A degree or order from which no appeal lies is open to review,
- A review petition or application is also maintainable in cases where the appeal is provided but no such appeal is preferred by the aggrieved party.
- Decisions on reference from the Court of Small Causes
By whom review may be made?
As per the definition, the review is a reconsideration of the same subject matter by the same court and by the same judge, so he only has jurisdiction to consider the case and earlier order passed by him.
But there may be situations wherein this course is not possible. The judicial officer may not be available due to the death of such other unexpected or unavoidable cause. Under these situations, his successor or any other judge or Court of concurrent jurisdiction may hear the review petitions and decide the same.
An application for review can be said to be a “proceeding” and a decision thereon amount to a “case decided” under the Code and such decision is revisable.
Thanks for reading