Review petition filed under CPC seeking review of an order based on additional documents. Court held review jurisdiction is limited to error apparent on record and not for considering fresh materials. Petition dismissed.
Review petition and connected applications dismissed. Impugned order of 17.12.2019 stands restored.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. P. SANDESH
REVIEW PETITION No.106/2021
IN
R.F.A.NO.198/2013
BETWEEN:
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT THERUBEEDI, MELINAPATE, NEAR POORNA CHICKEN CENTRE, HOSKOTE TOWN, HOSKOTE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562114.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI RAHUL S. REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
2
RESPONDENT NOS.3 TO 5 ARE RESIDING AT NO.72, MUDDALAPPA STREET, LALBAGH MAIN GATE, DODDAMAVALLI, BENGALURU-560004.
3
UPPARAHALLI, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU-560004.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI DAYANANDA K.G., ADVOCATE FOR R-1, SRI NARENDRA BABU, ADVOCATE FOR SRI P.M. SIDDAMALLAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 TO R-7)
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC, PRAYING THIS HONBLE COURT TO REVIEW THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.12.2019 IN RFA NO.198/2013 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned counsel for the respondents.
order dated 17.12.2019 passed in R.F.A.No.198/2013. The present petition is filed with delay of 47 days and hence I.A.No.2/2021 is filed for condonation of delay and I.A.No.1/2021 is filed for production of additional documents and based on the additional documents now which have been placed along with review petition, the counsel is seeking for an order to review the order passed by this Court. This Court can exercise the review jurisdiction under Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC if the
4
material has not been considered and error apparent on face of the record. Under these circumstances only the Court can review the order and not based on the additional documents, which has been placed before the Court now. Only in the appeal, the additional documents can be produced under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC and the same is not the scope of review petition. Hence, there is no merit in the review petition and the review petition is dismissed. Consequently, the I.As. are also dismissed.
Sd/JUDGE
MD
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a review petition can be entertained based on additional documents filed after the impugned order was passed.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Sunandamma w/o Munivenkatappa
Smt. Anusuyamma w/o Venkateshappa
Smt. Lakshmamma @ Doddalakshmamma
Smt. Nagarathnamma w/o Upendra
Smt. Anuradha N. w/o Late A. Srinivasanaidu
Sri Santhosh Kumar S. s/o Late A. Srinivasanaidu
H. P. Sandesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
