Smt Savitramma v. Smt E Shanthamma
Case brief
What is this about?
Karnataka HC single-judge order (M.G.S. Kamal, 12.02.2026, RP No.576/2025) dismissing a delayed review petition. Key themes: review under Order XLVII Rule 1 r/w Section 114 CPC; condonation of 2429-day delay refused (Section 5, Limitation Act); review petition on change of counsel deprecated per Tamil Nadu Electricity Board v. N. Raju Reddiar (1997) 9 SCC 736; alleged non-production of original Will dated 14.07.1997 by erstwhile advocate; identical ground already considered in RFA No.261/2012 c/w RFA No.482/2010, arising from suit O.S. No.2310/1998 decreed 13.11.2009 (schedule property, Bengaluru/Mandya parties). Useful for arguments on limitation of review petitions and futility of re-agitating considered grounds through new counsel.
What did the court decide?
It is a settled principle, as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Tamil Nadu Electricity Board v. N. Raju Reddiar, (1997) 9 SCC 736, that a review petition filed on a mere change of counsel shall generally not be entertained, and such practice is deprecated.