5.8 Per contra, learned counsel, Shri S. Venkatesh, appearing for the Respondent / Renew Power submitted that the instant review petition has been filed for review and / or rectification of judgment dtd. 06.12.2018 under Section 111 & 120 of the Electricity Act, 2003. However, the scope and object of a Review Petition as defined under order NVII Rule 1 of the CPC 1908 is entirely different than that of a rectification application, as defined under Section 152 CPC. In the present Petition/Application, GUVNL has interchangeably used the terms rectification oblique intent to reargue the Appeal No.209 of 2015 which is impermissible in law. Learned counsel was quick to point out that the Review Petitioner has also invoked Section 111 of the Act with the intent to argue the instant petition/application as a fresh appeal without appreciating that even by invoking powers of this Tribunal under a Review Petition or a rectification application, the entire appeal cannot be reargued. He stated that while examining the matter from a prospective of rectification application, it would be relevant to note the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab vs. Darshan Singh 2004 1 SCC 328. From a bare perusal of the above judgment, it is evident that rectification cannot be used as a device to question the merits of the case. The present case, GUVNL is attempting to reargue its Appeal by way of the present proceedings which is Impermissible in law.
