Smt Pillachanamma v. Smt Sakamma
Case brief
What is this about?
NC: 2026:KHC:25847 — Karnataka High Court (Bengaluru), H.P. Sandesh J., decided 02.06.2026; RP No. 57 of 2025. Review petition DISMISSED. Key points: limits of review jurisdiction under S.114 r/w Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC; no review absent error apparent on the record; grounds already considered cannot be re-agitated. Context: judgment dt.18.07.2024 in RSA No.1201/2019; RA No.23/2013 (dt.15.04.2019, Senior Civil Judge & JMFC Sidlaghatta, 1/9th share in suit Item No.7); OS No.271/2007 (dt.02.01.2013); revocation of gift deed; partitionability of suit Item No.7; counsel's reliance on Ex.P8 Record of Rights, Sy.No.26 (4 acres 7 guntas; 1 acre 10 1/2 guntas), MR No.195-2/92-93; Exs.P1 to P17. Useful for propositions on scope of review versus appeal.
What did the court decide?
In the absence of any error apparent on the record, the question of invoking the review jurisdiction does not arise; the scope of review is very limited, and grounds already urged and considered in paragraph No.8 of the judgment in Regular Second Appeal No.1201/2019 cannot be re-canvassed by once again sitting on the appeal.