Review: Provisions under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).

हिंदी में पढ़ें:

The provisions regarding review in the CPC are given under Section 114 and Order 47 (Rules 1 to 9), which allow a court to reconsider and correct its own judgment, order, etc. in certain specific circumstances. This provision covers all the fundamental aspects of review, such as when a review can be sought, who can apply for a review, which court has the power to consider a review, and what the grounds for review are, etc.

The provision for review exists to allow the same court to correct its own errors or to reconsider the matter based on new and significant evidence or compelling reasons that were not presented earlier, thus preventing the aggrieved party from being forced to appeal to a higher court. In this way, review acts as a self-correcting mechanism within the judicial system and enhances public confidence in the courts. Note: Certain conditions must be met before an application for review can be filed.

What is a Review?

A review is a legal mechanism or procedure by which the same court that passed a judgment, decree, order, etc., can reconsider the matter and, if necessary, modify it, and this is done due to an error, new evidence, or other compelling grounds. Section 114 grants the fundamental right of review, under which any person aggrieved by a judgment, decree, order, etc., can file a review application in the same court, and the court, after hearing the application, takes appropriate action. In most cases, a review is filed under three circumstances:

• When an appeal is allowed but not filed.
• When no appeal is allowed, or
• When the decision is from a Small Causes Court reference.

The power of review is discretionary and must be exercised judiciously and cautiously, and it cannot be used as a tool to re-argue the case, as it is not an appeal. This restriction ensures the finality of judgments, which is a fundamental principle of law. Note: The court considers a review application only if it is satisfied with the grounds and issues a notice to the opposing party before the hearing.

Objectives of Review

Following are the objectives of review:

1. Correction of apparent errors:

One of the most important purposes of a review is to correct obvious errors in the court’s judgment, as sometimes the court may issue an incorrect order due to unforeseen circumstances.

2. Prevention of miscarriage of justice:

Another objective of the review is to ensure that justice is not compromised due to human errors on the part of the court, as various types of human errors can occur, whether intentionally or unintentionally, and it is crucial to correct them.

3. Consideration of new evidence:

This objective ensures that decisions are based on complete and correct facts, thereby promoting substantive justice over procedural rigidity.

4. Reduction in unnecessary appeals:

Another objective of a review is to reduce unnecessary appeals to higher courts, thereby saving the appellate court’s time, as it empowers the same court to reconsider its own orders, judgments, decrees, etc.

5. Judicial self-correction:

The objective of a review is to empower the court to reconsider its own orders, judgments, decrees, etc., without having to go to a higher court, and to make necessary corrections. However, the court must remain within the limits of its established jurisdiction when conducting a review.

Grounds of Review

Following are the grounds of review:

1. Discovery of new and important matter or evidence:

When new and relevant information or evidence is discovered that is significant and was not previously known to the party, or when the evidence could not be obtained earlier despite all reasonable efforts, the party may file a review application so that the court can modify its order, judgment, decree, etc., accordingly.

2. Mistake or error apparent on the face of the record:

When an error is clearly evident in a court’s judgment, and that error relates to jurisdiction, or the court has failed to consider essential facts, the aggrieved party may file a review application pointing out the error or mistake (objection) so that the court can reconsider the matter and issue the correct and necessary order.

3. Any other sufficient reason:

If there is any other sufficient reason that compels the court to make necessary corrections in its own passed judgment, order, decree, etc., then the aggrieved party can file a review application in the same court, but the point to be noted is that it should fall under the provision of review.

Note:

• If there is a change in law after the decree passed by the court, you cannot file a review.
• A review must be filed within 30 days of the final decree.
• Re-review of review is not allowed.

Procedure of Review

Following are the procedure of review:

Step 1 – Filing of Review Application:

The review process begins with filing a review application. An aggrieved person can file a review application before the same court which passed the decree or order. The applicant must clearly mention the grounds of review.

Step 2 – Preliminary Examination by the Court:

In preliminary examination, the court examines whether there is sufficient ground for review or not. If court does not find any sufficient ground then they reject the application.

Step 3 – Notice to Opposite Party:

If court grant the review application, it issues a notice to the opposite party and gives them an opportunity to appear and be heard in support of the original decree or order. It is mandatory to give notice to the opposite party.

Step 4 – Hearing of Review Application:

The court then hears both parties. When review is related to discovery of new evidence then it is important to prove that the party was not previously aware of that evidence or it could not be obtained earlier despite due diligence.

Step 5 – Decision on Review:

After hearing both the parties, the court decides whether to grant or reject the review. If rejected, the matter ends there. If granted, the order is entered in the court register, and the court may proceed to re-hear the case.

Step 6 – Re-hearing and Final Order:

Once review is granted, the court re-hears the case and passes a new decree and order.

Provisions for review under CPC

Following provisions for review are available under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC):

Section 114 – Review:

“Subject as aforesaid, any person considering himself aggrieved—

• (a) by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed by this Code, but from which no appeal has been preferred.
• (b) by a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed by this Code, 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, and the Court may make such order thereon as it thinks fit.“

Order 47 – Review:

Rule 1 – Application for review of judgment:

1. A person can ask the same court to review its judgment if he or she feels it is wrong.
2. Following are the major grounds under which reviews can be filed:
   • When an appeal is allowed but not filed.
   • When no appeal is allowed.
   • When the decision is from a Small Causes Court reference.
3. Review is allowed only on specific reasons, such as:
   • When new and important evidence is found.
   • If there is a clear mistake or error visible on the face of the record.
   • Any other Reasonable reason.
4. The application for review must be made to the same court that passed the decree or order. Just because a higher court later changes the law in another case is not a valid reason for filing a review petition.
5. If another party has filed an appeal even then a person may ask for a review, review is not a second appeal. It is only meant to correct clear mistakes or consider new evidence that could not be produced earlier.

(1) 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,

and who, from the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence was not within his knowledge or could not be produced by him at the time when the decree was passed or order made, or on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record or for any other sufficient reason, desires to obtain a review of the decree passed or order made against him, may apply for a review of judgment to the Court which passed the decree or made the order.

(2) A party who is not appealing from a decree or order may apply for a review of judgment notwithstanding the pendency of an appeal by some other party except where the ground of such appeal is common to the applicant and the appellant, or when, being respondent, he can present to the Appellate Court the case on which he applied for the review.

[Explanation.—The fact that the decision on a question of law on which the judgment of the Court is based has been reversed or modified by the subsequent decision of a superior Court in any other case, shall not be a ground for the review of such judgment.]

Bare Language

Rule 2 – To whom applications for review may be made:

This rule has been repealed by section 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1956 (66 of 1956).

Rule 3 – Form of applications for review:

An application for review must be made in the same form as an appeal. All rules that apply to the format of an appeal (like presentation, details, verification, etc.) also apply to a review application.

The provisions as to the form of preferring appeals shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to applications for review.

Bare Language

The words “mutatis mutandis” mean “with necessary changes”. So, the rules are applied with suitable adjustments, because a review is not exactly an Appeal.

Rule 4 – Application where rejected:

When a review application is filed, the court first examines whether there is a valid reason for review. If the court feels that sufficient grounds are not present, then the court directly rejects the application.

If the court finds a valid reason, then it can accept the application after following certain rules; The court has to inform the opposite party so as to give him an opportunity to appear and defend the original decree or order.

If a review is filed based on new evidence, the applicant must clearly prove that the evidence was not previously known and therefore could not have been presented earlier.

(1) Where it appears to the Court that there is not sufficient ground for a review, it shall reject the application.

(2) Application where granted. —Where the Court is of opinion that the application for review should be granted, it shall grant the same:

Provided that—

(a) no such application shall be granted without previous notice to the opposite party, to enable him to appear and be heard in support of the decree or order, a review of which is applied for; and

(b) no such application shall be granted on the ground of discovery of new matter or evidence which the applicant alleges was not within his knowledge, or could not be adduced by him when the decree or order was passed or made, without strict proof of such allegation.

Bare Language

Rule 5 – Application for review in Court consisting of two or more Judges:

If a case was decided by two or more judges and a review is filed against that decision, the same judge or judges who decided the case earlier should hear the review, provided they are still in the court and available within six months. No other judge or judges can hear the review.

Where the Judge or Judges, or any one of the Judges, who passed the decree or made the order a review of which is applied for, continues or continued attached to the Court at the time when the application for a review is presented, and is not or not precluded by absence or other cause for a period of six months next after the application from considering the decree or order to which the application refers, such Judge or Judges or any of them shall hear the application, and no other Judge or Judges of the Court shall hear the same.

Bare Language

Rule 6 – Application where rejected:

• If a review application is heard by more than one judge, they must decide it together, if the judges are equally divided (same number for and against), the review is rejected.
• If more judges support one view, the decision will follow the majority.

(1) Where the application for a review is heard by more than one Judge and the Court is equally divided, the application shall be rejected.

(2) Where there is a majority, the decision shall be according to the opinion of the majority.

Bare Language

Rule 7 – Order of rejection not appealable. Objections to order granting application:

• If the court rejects a review application, no appeal can be filed against that rejection.
• If the court grants a review application, the opposite party can object to it.
• If the review application was rejected because the applicant did not appear in court, the applicant can ask for it to be restored. For restoration, the applicant must prove a sufficient reason for his absence.
• No restoration order can be passed unless notice is given to the opposite party.

[(1) An order of the Court rejecting the application shall not be appealable; but an order granting an application may be objected to at once by an appeal from the order granting the application or in an appeal from the decree or order finally passed or made in the suit.] – Subs. by Act 104 of 1976, s. 92, for sub-rule (1) (w.e.f. 1-2-1977).

(2) Where the application has been rejected in consequence of the failure of the applicant to appear, he may apply for an order to have the rejected application restored to the file, and, where it is proved to the satisfaction of the Court that he was prevented by any sufficient cause from appearing which such application was called on for hearing, the Court shall order it to be restored to the file upon such terms as to costs or otherwise as it thinks fit, and shall appoint a day for hearing the same.

(3) No order shall be made under sub-rule (2) unless notice of the application has been served on the
opposite party.

Bare Language

Rule 8 – Registry of application granted, and order for re-hearings:

Once the review is granted, it is officially recorded, and the court can re-hear the case right away or later, as it thinks proper.

When an application for review is granted, a note thereof shall be made in the register and the Court may at once re-hear the case or make such order in regard to the re-hearing as it thinks fit.

Bare Language

Rule 9 – Bar of certain application:

Once a review petition has been decided, you cannot file another review. In short, No second review of a review.

No application to review an order made on an application for a review or a decree or order passed or made on a review shall be entertained.

Bare Language

Read Also:

• Reference: Provisions under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).
• Bail and its types under BNSS
• Power of criminal courts in India under BNSS
• Theft and its provisions under BNS
• Crime: Elements and Stages of a Crime.
• Extortion: Meaning and its provisions (under BNS)
• Writ: Provisions under the Indian Constitution

QNA/FAQ

Source:

• https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/13813/1/the_code_of_civil_procedure%2C_1908.pdf
• The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908