Review petitions under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC sought review of a common judgment dismissing second appeals. The Court held the grounds merely sought rehearing of the appeal without any error apparent on the face of the record and dismissed all petitions.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:13811 RP NO. 126/2024 C/w RP NO.127/2024, RP NO.128/2024, RP NO.129/2024, RP NO.130/2024, RP NO.131/2024, RP NO.132/2024, RP NO.133/2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
REVIEW PETITION NO. 126 OF 2024 C/W RP NO.127/2024, RP NO.128/2024 RP NO.129/2024, RP NO.130/2024 RP NO.131/2024, RP NO.132/2024 RP NO.133/2024
IN RP NO. 126/2024
BETWEEN:
SRI P MUNIRAJU
S/O LATE PILLAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, BANGARPET TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162
…PETITIONER
Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: High Court of Karnataka
(BY SRI. PRAKASH K A.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
S/O LATE NEELAKANTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, C/O MR K R MAHESH
R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, BANGARPET TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162.
NC: 2024:KHC:13811 RP NO. 126/2024 C/w RP NO.127/2024, RP NO.128/2024, RP NO.129/2024, RP NO.130/2024, RP NO.131/2024, RP NO.132/2024, RP NO.133/2024
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, BANGARPET TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162.
…RESPONDENTS
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC PRAYING TO KINDLY REVIEW THE JUDGMENT DATED:5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 PASSED IN RSA NO.1109/2023 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THIS REVIEW PETITION.
IN RP NO. 127/2024
BETWEEN:
SRI. VENKATARAMAPPA
S/O LATE HOLURU MUNISHWAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS, R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, BANGARPET TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRAKASH K A.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, BANGARPET TLAUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162.
S/O SRI K S RAMACHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST,
NC: 2024:KHC:13811 RP NO. 126/2024 C/w RP NO.127/2024, RP NO.128/2024, RP NO.129/2024, RP NO.130/2024, RP NO.131/2024, RP NO.132/2024, RP NO.133/2024
BANGARPET TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162.
…RESPONDENTS THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC PRAYING TO KINDLY REVIEW THE JUDGMENT DATED:5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 PASSED IN RSA NO.1110/2023 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THIS REVIEW PETITION.
IN RP NO. 128/2024
BETWEEN:
R GOPALAPPA S/O LATE RAMAIAH SINCE DEAD BY LRS
NC: 2024:KHC:13811 RP NO. 126/2024 C/w RP NO.127/2024, RP NO.128/2024, RP NO.129/2024, RP NO.130/2024, RP NO.131/2024, RP NO.132/2024, RP NO.133/2024
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PRAKASH K A.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
…RESPONDENTS
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC PRAYING TO KINDLY REVIEW THE JUDGMENT DATED:5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 PASSED IN RSA NO.1111/2023 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THIS REVIEW PETITION.
NC: 2024:KHC:13811 RP NO. 126/2024 C/w RP NO.127/2024, RP NO.128/2024, RP NO.129/2024, RP NO.130/2024, RP NO.131/2024, RP NO.132/2024, RP NO.133/2024
IN RP NO. 129/2024
BETWEEN:
S/O LATE PILLAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, BANGARPET TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRAKASH K A.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
C/O MR K R MAHESH
R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, BANGARPET TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162.
S/O SRI K S RAMACHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, BANGARPET TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162.
…RESPONDENTS
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC PRAYING TO KINDLY REVIEW THE JUDGMENT DATED:5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 PASSED IN RSA NO.1111/2023 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THIS REVIEW PETITION.
NC: 2024:KHC:13811 RP NO. 126/2024 C/w RP NO.127/2024, RP NO.128/2024, RP NO.129/2024, RP NO.130/2024, RP NO.131/2024, RP NO.132/2024, RP NO.133/2024
IN RP NO. 130/2024
BETWEEN:
SRI. AGASHAPPA S/O LATE KURESHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, BANGARPET TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRAKASH K A.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
…RESPONDENTS
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC PRAYING TO KINDLY REVIEW THE JUDGMENT DATED:5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 PASSED IN RSA NO.1114/2023 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THIS REVIEW PETITION.
NC: 2024:KHC:13811 RP NO. 126/2024 C/w RP NO.127/2024, RP NO.128/2024, RP NO.129/2024, RP NO.130/2024, RP NO.131/2024, RP NO.132/2024, RP NO.133/2024
IN RP NO. 131/2024
BETWEEN:
SRI. AGASHAPPA
S/O LATE KURESHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST BANGARPET TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRAKASH K A.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
S/O LATE NEELAKANTAIAH AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS C/O MR K.R. MAHESH
R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST BANGARPET TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162.
S/O SRI. K.S. RAMACHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST BANGARPET TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162
…RESPONDENTS
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC PRAYING TO KINDLY REVIEW THE JUDGMENT DATED:5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 PASSED IN RSA NO.1119/2023 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THIS REVIEW PETITION.
IN RP NO. 132/2024
BETWEEN:
SRI. VENKATARAMAPPA
S/O LATE HOLURU MUNISHWAMAPPA
NC: 2024:KHC:13811 RP NO. 126/2024 C/w RP NO.127/2024, RP NO.128/2024, RP NO.129/2024, RP NO.130/2024, RP NO.131/2024, RP NO.132/2024, RP NO.133/2024
AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS
R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST BANGARPET TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRAKASH K A.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
S/O LATE NEELAKANTAIAH
AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS
C/O MR. K.R. MAHESH
R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST
BANGARPET TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162.
S/O SRI. K.S. RAMACHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST BANGARPET TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162.
…RESPONDENTS
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC PRAYING TO KINDLY REVIEW THE JUDGMENT DATED:5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 PASSED IN RSA NO.1118/2023 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THIS REVIEW PETITION.
IN RP NO. 133/2024
BETWEEN:
R GOPALAPPA S/O LATE RAMAIAH SINCE DEAD BY LRS
NC: 2024:KHC:13811 RP NO. 126/2024 C/w RP NO.127/2024, RP NO.128/2024, RP NO.129/2024, RP NO.130/2024, RP NO.131/2024, RP NO.132/2024, RP NO.133/2024
ALL ARE R/AT KARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST BANGARPET TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 162
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PRAKASH K A.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
NC: 2024:KHC:13811 RP NO. 126/2024 C/w RP NO.127/2024, RP NO.128/2024, RP NO.129/2024, RP NO.130/2024, RP NO.131/2024, RP NO.132/2024, RP NO.133/2024
…RESPONDENTS
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC PRAYING TO KINDLY REVIEW THE JUDGMENT DATED:5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 PASSED IN RSA NO.1120/2023 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THIS REVIEW PETITION.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
These review petitions are filed seeking review of judgment and decree dated 05.02.2024 passed in R.S.A.No.1109/2023 C/w 1110/2023, 1111/2023, 1113/2023, 1114/2023, 1118/2023, 1119/2023, 1120/2023 by this Court.
NC: 2024:KHC:13811 RP NO. 126/2024 C/w RP NO.127/2024, RP NO.128/2024, RP NO.129/2024, RP NO.130/2024, RP NO.131/2024, RP NO.132/2024, RP NO.133/2024
hearing of the appeal. Review petitioner cannot be allowed
under the guise of review to reagitate the case again, which has already been decided. Once the matter is decided, unless error apparent on the face is made out, the Court cannot revisit the merits of the contention. The grounds urged in these petitions not only address the reasoning given by this Court but also require this Court to
go into the contents of the reasoning given by the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court which do not under any circumstances fall within the purview of the review jurisdiction.
Judgment/order is open for review only if there is a mistake or an error apparent on the face of the record. An error which is not self evident and has to be detected by process of reasoning, can hardly be said to be an error apparent on the face of the record. A review petition cannot be allowed to be an appeal in disguise ( Sanjay
NC: 2024:KHC:13811 RP NO. 126/2024 C/w RP NO.127/2024, RP NO.128/2024, RP NO.129/2024, RP NO.130/2024, RP NO.131/2024, RP NO.132/2024, RP NO.133/2024
Kumar Agarwal Vs State Tax Officer and anr reported in 2023 SCC Online SC 1406 ).
As such, these review petitions are dismissed.
Sd/JUDGE
RL
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the grounds urged make out an error apparent on the face of the record warranting review of the judgment in the RSAs?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sanjay Kumar Agarwal Vs State Tax Officer and anrRelied on¶3
2023 SCC Online SC 1406 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
P Muniraju
Venkataramappa
R Gopalappa (dead) by LRs
Agashappa
K N Srinivasaiah
K R Mahesh
M.G.S. Kamal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
