{"id":238161,"date":"2020-10-29T14:00:09","date_gmt":"2020-10-29T08:30:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=238161"},"modified":"2020-10-30T09:35:31","modified_gmt":"2020-10-30T04:05:31","slug":"mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/","title":{"rendered":"MP HC | In the garb of review, rehearing cannot be permitted; Court dismisses review petition finding no error apparent"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Madhya Pradesh High Court<\/strong>: In a case seeking review of an order of this particular Court by the petitioner, Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J., dismissed the same finding no ground to interfere in the original order.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The instant review petition has been filed under Order 47 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) for review of the order dated 08-09-2020 passed in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 470 of 2015 (<em>Sharda Begum v. Kallu<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The facts, in brief, are such that the son of petitioner 1 and 2 lost his life in an accident. He was a truck driver and under the employment of respondent 2. Petitioners filed a claim before the Tenth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior which passed an award of Rs 3,63,000 in Claim Case No. 143 of 2010 with interest in favour of the petitioners. Being unsatisfied with the award, the petitioners then filed an appeal before this Court for enhancement of the award amount. This Court by order date 08-09-2020 enhanced the amount to Rs 5,99,200.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Aggrieved with the said order, the present review petition has been preferred by the petitioners.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Counsel for the petitioners, Mahesh Haswani has submitted that the entire family of the deceased was dependent on him hence dependency should be assessed as 1\/3rd but this Court has wrongly assessed the dependency as 1\/2. Through the present review petition, the petitioners seek a modification in the impugned order to the extent of determining the dependency as 1\/3rd and not 1\/2 on the deceased.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Counsel for the respondents, Nirendra Singh vehemently opposed the petitioner\u2019s submissions and prayed for the rejection of this petition.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court relied heavily on the judgments delivered in the cases of <em>Board of Control of Cricket India v. Netaji Cricket Club<\/em>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/pC35pUfV\">(2005) 4 SCC 741<\/a>, <em>Union of India v. Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd.<\/em>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/x7I4tB9U\">2008 SCC OnLine Pat 1497<\/a> and <em>Akhilesh Yadav v. Vishwanath Chaturvedi<\/em>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/3CS7VvK3\">(20130 2 SCC 1<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><em>\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>Upon careful consideration of the facts, circumstances and arguments advanced the Court observed that the scope of review by a civil court has been circumscribed by Section 114 of the CPC which provides that a review of an order is permissible upon the discovery of new and important matter of evidence. In the present case, nothing new has been brought before this Court by the petitioners. It is a well-settled position in law as reiterated in the case of <em>Abhijit Tea Company (P) Ltd. v.\u00a0 Terai Tea Company (P) Ltd.<\/em>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/N1L5F0l0\">1994 SCC OnLine Cal 294<\/a> that only errors apparent on the face of record are liable to be reviewed and such errors must state one in the face where no elaborate arguments are necessary to pinpoint those errors.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The court also remarked that it is well settled that <em>in the guise of review, a rehearing is not permissible. In order to seek review it has to be demonstrated that order suffers from error apparent on the face of record. The Court while deciding the application for review cannot sit in appeal over the judgment or decree passed by it. The review petitioner cannot be given liberty to readdress the Court on merits because it is not an appeal in disguise where the judgment\/order is to be considered on merits.<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">While arriving at the above-stated observation, the Court referred the cases of <em>S. Bagirathi Ammal v. Palani Roman Catholic Mission<\/em>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/56SXe2vd\">(2009) 10 SCC 464<\/a> and <em>State of West Bengal v. Kamal Sengupta<\/em>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/t94zR7l6\">(2008) 8 SCC 612<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In view of the above, the review petition has been dismissed by this Court since the original order does not suffer from any error apparent that might warrant intervention.[Sharda Begam v. Kallu, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/9qWnS4IT\"><b>2020 SCC OnLine MP 2419<\/b><\/a>, decided on 23-10-2020]<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p><span style=\"color: #008000;\">Yashvardhan Shrivastav, Editorial Assistant has put this story together<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madhya Pradesh High Court: In a case seeking review of an order of this particular Court by the petitioner, Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[29785,43921,32639,2897,43922],"class_list":["post-238161","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-law","tag-order-47-rule-1-of-the-civil-procedure-code","tag-rehearing","tag-Review","tag-review-order"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>MP HC | In the garb of review, rehearing cannot be permitted; Court dismisses review petition finding no error apparent | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"MP HC | In the garb of review, rehearing cannot be permitted; Court dismisses review petition finding no error apparent\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Madhya Pradesh High Court: In a case seeking review of an order of this particular Court by the petitioner, Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava,\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-10-29T08:30:09+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-10-30T04:05:31+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/MP-high-court1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/\",\"name\":\"MP HC | In the garb of review, rehearing cannot be permitted; Court dismisses review petition finding no error apparent | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-10-29T08:30:09+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-10-30T04:05:31+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"MP HC | In the garb of review, rehearing cannot be permitted; Court dismisses review petition finding no error apparent\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"MP HC | In the garb of review, rehearing cannot be permitted; Court dismisses review petition finding no error apparent | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"MP HC | In the garb of review, rehearing cannot be permitted; Court dismisses review petition finding no error apparent","og_description":"Madhya Pradesh High Court: In a case seeking review of an order of this particular Court by the petitioner, Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava,","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2020-10-29T08:30:09+00:00","article_modified_time":"2020-10-30T04:05:31+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/MP-high-court1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/","name":"MP HC | In the garb of review, rehearing cannot be permitted; Court dismisses review petition finding no error apparent | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2020-10-29T08:30:09+00:00","dateModified":"2020-10-30T04:05:31+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/29\/mp-hc-in-the-garb-of-review-rehearing-cannot-be-permitted-court-dismisses-review-petition-finding-no-error-apparent\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"MP HC | In the garb of review, rehearing cannot be permitted; Court dismisses review petition finding no error apparent"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":215764,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/06\/15\/mp-hc-no-reason-to-review-by-court-if-there-is-no-error-apparent-on-the-face-of-record-review-petition-dismissed\/","url_meta":{"origin":238161,"position":0},"title":"MP HC | No reason to review by court if there is no error apparent on the face of record; review petition dismissed","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 15, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Madhya Pradesh High Court: A Division Bench of S.C. Sharma and Virender Singh, JJ., dismissed the review petition on the ground that no interference was required when there was no error apparent on the face of the record. A Public Interest Litigation Writ Petition was made by certain persons against\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":271106,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/03\/madhya-pradesh-high-court-review-of-an-order-passed-in-a-review-petition-under-order-xlvii-rule-9-held-not-maintainable-petition-dismissed\/","url_meta":{"origin":238161,"position":1},"title":"Madhya Pradesh High Court | Review of an order passed in a review petition under Order XLVII Rule 9 held not maintainable; Petition dismissed","author":"Editor","date":"August 3, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Madhya Pradesh High Court: The Division Bench of Ravi Malimath, CJ. and Vishal Mishra, J. dismissed a second review petition holding that pursuant to the provision under Order XLVII Rule 9 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC), a review of an order passed in a review petition is not maintainable. A\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madhya Pradesh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":286738,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/11\/can-power-of-review-be-used-to-re-write-a-settled-judgement-appeal-in-disguise-supreme-court-denies\/","url_meta":{"origin":238161,"position":2},"title":"Review application cannot be used as an Appeal in disguise, reiterates Supreme Court","author":"Editor","date":"March 11, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cAn erroneous order may be subjected to appeal before the higher forum but cannot be a subject matter of review under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC\u201d, stated the Supreme Court","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-703.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-703.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-703.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-703.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":240588,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/12\/nclt-if-an-applicant-finds-the-finding-of-a-judgment-to-be-erroneous-can-he-be-permitted-to-seek-rehearing-of-appeal-under-r-11-of-nclat-rules-2016-tribunal-considers\/","url_meta":{"origin":238161,"position":3},"title":"NCLAT | If an applicant finds the finding of a Judgment to be erroneous, can he be permitted to seek rehearing of appeal under R. 11 of NCLAT Rules, 2016? Tribunal considers","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 12, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Law Appellate\u00a0Tribunal(NCLAT): The Division Bench of Justice Bansi Lal Bhat (Acting Chairperson) and Shreesha Merla (Technical Member), while addressing the present appeal observed that: Exercise of inherent powers under Rule 11 has limitations and same cannot be enlarged to review the decisions. Company Appeal titled\u00a0Anubhav Anilkumar Agarwal v.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":359490,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/09\/supreme-court-restates-principles-for-review-jurisdiction-grounds\/","url_meta":{"origin":238161,"position":4},"title":"SC restates principles on power, scope &amp; grounds for Review Jurisdiction; Sets aside Madras HC review order on daughter\u2019s status as co-parcener","author":"Sucheta","date":"September 9, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cTo wit through a review application, an apparent error of fact or law is intimated to the court, but no extra reasoning is undertaken to explain the said error\u201d.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Review Jurisdiction grounds","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/Review-Jurisdiction-grounds.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/Review-Jurisdiction-grounds.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/Review-Jurisdiction-grounds.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/Review-Jurisdiction-grounds.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":205937,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/11\/29\/rehearing-of-issues-not-allowed-in-cases-of-review-but-the-commission-may-interfere-in-cases-where-there-is-an-apparent-error-in-the-order\/","url_meta":{"origin":238161,"position":5},"title":"Rehearing of issues not allowed in cases of review but Commission may interfere where there is an apparent error in the order  \u00a0","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 29, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): A Single Member Bench of Prem Narain (Presiding Member), partly allowed a review petition filed against the order of the Commission, whereby names of various complainants were included in the order although some of them had withdrawn their complaints while others were not even\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/238161","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=238161"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/238161\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=238161"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=238161"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=238161"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}