Introduction
Any person is prone to mistakes and judiciary is no exception.
Article 137 of the Constitution of India
The Constitution of India through Article 137 confers upon the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India the power to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it, in the following terms:-
137. Review of judgments or orders by the Supreme Court– Subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament or any rules made under article 145, the Supreme Court shall have power to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it
Review under the Supreme Court Rules, 2013
Pursuant to the powers under Article 145 of the Constitution of India the Hon’ble Supreme Court with the approval of the President has made the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, which governs the practice and procedure of the Hon’ble Court. The rules are arranged in IX (9) parts, LVII (57) orders and IV (4) schedules. Order XLVII provides for the rules to regulate the review practice and procedure before the Hon’ble Supreme Court which is reproduced verbatim hereinunder:
Part-IV, Order XLVII: REVIEW
1. The Court may review its judgment or order, but no application for review will be entertained in a civil proceeding except on the ground mentioned in Order XLVII, rule 1 of the Code, and in a criminal proceeding except on the ground of an error apparent on the face of the record.
The application for review shall be accompanied by a certificate of the Advocate on Record certifying that it is the first application for review and is based on the grounds admissible under the
Rules.
2. An application for review shall be by a petition, and shall be filed within thirty days from the date of the judgment or order sought to be reviewed. It shall set out clearly the grounds for review.
3. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court an application for review shall be disposed of by circulation without any oral arguments, but the petitioner may supplement his petition by additional written arguments. The Court may either dismiss the petition or direct notice to the opposite party. An application for review shall as far as practicable be circulated to the same Judge or Bench of Judges that delivered the judgment or order sought to be reviewed.
4. Where on an application for review the Court reverses or modifies its former decision in the case on the ground of mistake of law or fact, the Court, may, if it thinks fit in the interests of justice to do so, direct the refund to the petitioner of the court-fee paid on the application in whole
or in part, as it may think fit.
5. Where an application for review of any judgment and order has been made and disposed of, no further application for review shall be entertained in the same matter.
Review in Civil matters
Any review before the Hon’ble Supreme Court is entertained in civil matters or proceedings like SLP, Transfer Petition, Appeals, Writ Petition etc. only on three grounds as mentioned in Order XLVII Rule I of the Code of Civil Procedure, which are:-
1. discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due-diligence was not within Review Applicant’s knowledge or could not be produced by him at the time when the judgment was passed or order made, or;
2. on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record or;
3. for any other sufficient reason.
Review in Criminal matters
Any review before the Hon’ble Supreme Court is entertained in criminal matters or proceedings like SLP, Transfer Petition, Appeals, Writ Petition etc. only on one ground i.e. error apparent on the face of the record.
Maintainability of Review
The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Kamlesh Verma v. Mayawati, (2013) 8 SCC 320 issued a set of guidelines for maintainability of review petition under Article 137 of the Constitution as under:-
(i) A repetition of old and overruled argument is not enough to reopen concluded adjudications.
(ii) Minor mistakes of inconsequential import.
(iii) Review proceedings cannot be equated with the original hearing of the case.
(iv) Review is not maintainable unless the material error, manifest on the face of the order, undermines its soundness or results in miscarriage of justice.
(v) A review is by no means an appeal in disguise whereby an erroneous decision is reheard and corrected but lies only for patent error.
(vi) The mere possibility of two views on the subject cannot be a ground for review.
(vii) The error apparent on the face of the record should not be an error which has to be fished out and searched.
(viii) The appreciation of evidence on record is fully within the domain of the appellate court, it cannot be permitted to be advanced in the review petition.
(ix) Review is not maintainable when the same relief sought at the time of arguing the main matter had been negatived.
quote indent
text indent