{"id":306794,"date":"2023-11-08T11:00:43","date_gmt":"2023-11-08T05:30:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=306794"},"modified":"2023-11-08T10:53:25","modified_gmt":"2023-11-08T05:23:25","slug":"review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/","title":{"rendered":"Review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise: Supreme Court regurgitates law on scope of review"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Supreme Court:<\/span> In a batch of review petitions seeking review of the common judgment and Order dated 06-09-2022 in two appeals preferred by the State Tax Office, the division bench of A.S. Bopanna and <span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Bela M. Trivedi*<\/span>, JJ. while dismissing the review petition, opined that a well-considered judgment sought to be reviewed does not fall within the scope and ambit of review.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The appeal was against the Judgment and Order dated 19-12-2019 passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (&#8216;NCLAT&#8217;), wherein the Tribunal dismissed the appeal against the order , wherein it was held that the appellant cannot claim first charge over the property of the Corporate Debtor, as Section 48 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax 2003 (&#8216;GVAT Act&#8217;) cannot prevail over Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549788\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">53<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002802178\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016<\/a> (&#8216;IBC&#8217;). The Court had held that NCLAT clearly erred in its observation that Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549788\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">53<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002802178\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">IBC<\/a> overrides Section 48 GVAT Act. Further, Section 48 GVAT Act is not contrary to or inconsistent with Section 53 or any other provisions of IBC<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Scope of Review:<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court said that the power to review its judgments has been conferred on the Supreme Court by Article <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001574866\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">137<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726967\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Constitution of India<\/a>. This power is subject to the provisions of any law made by the Parliament, or the Rules made under Article 145.<\/p>\n<p>After taking note of various decisions, the Court stated the following:<\/p>\n<ul style=\"list-style-type: disc;\">\n<li>\n<p>A judgment is open to review inter alia if there is a mistake or an error apparent on the face of the record.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p>A judgment pronounced by the Court is final, and departure from that principle is justified only when circumstances of a substantial and compelling character make it necessary to do so.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p>An error which is not self-evident and has to be detected by a process of reasoning, can hardly be said to be an error apparent on the face of record justifying the court to exercise its power of review.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p>In exercise of the jurisdiction under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC, it is not permissible for an erroneous decision to be &#8220;reheard and corrected.&#8221;<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p>A Review Petition has a limited purpose and cannot be allowed to be &#8220;an appeal in disguise.&#8221;<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p>Under the guise of review, the petitioner cannot be permitted to reagitate and reargue the questions which have already been addressed and decided.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p>An error on the face of record must be such an error which, mere looking at the record should strike and it should not require any long-drawn process of reasoning on the points where there may conceivably be two opinions.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Even the change in law or subsequent decision\/ judgment of a co-ordinate or larger Bench by itself cannot be regarded as a ground for review.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Analysis:<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">After taking note of the legal position of seeking review, the Court reiterated that a co-ordinate Bench cannot comment upon the judgment rendered by another co-ordinate Bench of equal strength and that subsequent decision or a judgment of a co-ordinate Bench or larger Bench by itself cannot be regarded as a ground for review.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court rejected the submissions made by the Review Petitioners that the Court in the impugned decision had failed to consider the waterfall mechanism as contained in Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549788\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">53<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002802178\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">IBC<\/a> and failed to consider other provisions of IBC, as it is evident from the impugned judgment, that the Court had considered not only the waterfall mechanism under Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549788\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">53<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002802178\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">IBC<\/a> but also the other provisions of the IBC for deciding the priority for the purpose of distributing the proceeds from the sale as liquidation assets.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court said that the Court in the impugned judgment had categorically reproduced Section 53, other provisions of IBC along with the Regulations of 2016, and the subsequent amendments in the Regulations of 2018, regarding the submission of claims to be made by the creditors.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court opined that a well-considered judgment sought to be reviewed does not fall within the scope and ambit of Review. The Review petitioners have failed to make out any mistake or error apparent on the face of record in the impugned judgment and have failed to bring the case within the parameters laid down by this Court in various decision for reviewing the impugned judgment. Thus, the Court dismissed the review petition.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\">Sanjay Kumar Agarwal v. State Tax Officer (1), <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/pvckyHN7\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">2023 SCC OnLine SC 1406<\/a>, decided on 31-10-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #000080;\">*Judgment Authored by: Justice Bela M Trivedi<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"qJiwLWHwTf\"><p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/10\/know-your-judge-supreme-court-of-india-bela-m-trivedi-career-judgments-legal-news\/\">Know Thy Judge | Supreme Court of India: Justice Bela Madhurya Trivedi<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\" sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" style=\"position: absolute; clip: rect(1px, 1px, 1px, 1px);\" title=\"&#8220;Know Thy Judge | Supreme Court of India: Justice Bela Madhurya Trivedi&#8221; &#8212; SCC Blog\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/10\/know-your-judge-supreme-court-of-india-bela-m-trivedi-career-judgments-legal-news\/embed\/#?secret=0JF07natAJ#?secret=qJiwLWHwTf\" data-secret=\"qJiwLWHwTf\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\"><\/iframe><\/p>\n<h3 style=\"color: #000080;\">Buy Constitution of India &nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.ebcwebstore.com\/product_info.php?products_id=33\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.ebcwebstore.com\/product_info.php?products_id=33\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/constitution-of-india-300x200.jpg\" alt=\"Constitution of India\" width=\"300\" height=\"200\" class=\"aligncenter size-large wp-image-294438\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/constitution-of-india-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/constitution-of-india-768x511.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/constitution-of-india-440x293.jpg 440w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/constitution-of-india-650x433.jpg 650w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/constitution-of-india.jpg 886w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/constitution-of-india-60x40.jpg 60w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p style=\"font-style: italic;\">Supreme Court reiterated that a co-ordinate Bench cannot comment upon the judgment rendered by another co-ordinate Bench of equal strength and that subsequent decision or a judgment of a co-ordinate Bench or larger Bench by itself cannot be regarded as a ground for review.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67512,"featured_media":306798,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[8991,62573,62576,62574,62575,30361,30182,22014,2897,62572,5363],"class_list":["post-306794","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-appeal","tag-appeal-in-disguise","tag-article-137-of-constitution","tag-gavt","tag-gujarat-value-added-tax","tag-ibc","tag-national-company-law-appellate-tribunal","tag-nclat","tag-Review","tag-scope-of-review","tag-supreme-court"],"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>Review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise: Supreme Court regurgitates scope of review | SCC Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Supreme Court regurgitated scope of review and said that review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise\" \/>\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\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise: Supreme Court regurgitates law on scope of review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court regurgitated scope of review and said that review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/\" \/>\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=\"2023-11-08T05:30:43+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/scope-of-review.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise: Supreme Court regurgitates law on scope of review\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 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\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/\",\"name\":\"Review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise: Supreme Court regurgitates scope of review | SCC Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/scope-of-review.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-11-08T05:30:43+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\"},\"description\":\"Supreme Court regurgitated scope of review and said that review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/scope-of-review.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/scope-of-review.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"scope of review\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise: Supreme Court regurgitates law on scope of review\"}]},{\"@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\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\",\"name\":\"Apoorva\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Apoorva\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise: Supreme Court regurgitates scope of review | SCC Blog","description":"Supreme Court regurgitated scope of review and said that review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise","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\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise: Supreme Court regurgitates law on scope of review","og_description":"Supreme Court regurgitated scope of review and said that review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2023-11-08T05:30:43+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/scope-of-review.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Apoorva","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise: Supreme Court regurgitates law on scope of review","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Apoorva","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/","name":"Review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise: Supreme Court regurgitates scope of review | SCC Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/scope-of-review.webp","datePublished":"2023-11-08T05:30:43+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9"},"description":"Supreme Court regurgitated scope of review and said that review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/scope-of-review.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/scope-of-review.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"scope of review"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/08\/review-petition-has-limited-purpose-cannot-be-allowed-to-be-appeal-in-disguise-sc-regurgitates-scope-of-review\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Review Petition has limited purpose, cannot be allowed to be appeal in disguise: Supreme Court regurgitates law on scope of review"}]},{"@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\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9","name":"Apoorva","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Apoorva"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/scope-of-review.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"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":306794,"position":0},"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":294491,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/13\/nclat-power-recall-its-judgement-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":306794,"position":1},"title":"Does NCLAT have power to review or recall its judgment? NCLAT 5-member bench answers","author":"Ritu","date":"June 13, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"A 5-member bench overturned two judgments delivered by 3-judge bench which held that the NCLAT does not have the power to review or recall its own judgements.","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 company law appellate tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"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":306794,"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":215629,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/06\/13\/nclat-appeal-under-s-61-ibc-not-maintainable-in-absence-of-decision-by-adjudicating-authority\/","url_meta":{"origin":306794,"position":3},"title":"NCLAT | Appeal under S. 61 IBC not maintainable in absence of decision by Adjudicating Authority","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 13, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT):\u00a0The Bench comprising of S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. (Chairperson) and A.I.S Cheema, J. and Kanthi Narahari, Members, Judicial and Technical, respectively; declined to intervene and place any opinion for the appeal made by Ex-Directors and Promoters of Bhushan Power and Steel Limited which stated that: \"More than\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":243495,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/06\/the-doctrine-of-merger\/","url_meta":{"origin":306794,"position":4},"title":"The Doctrine of Merger","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 6, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Vilas Govindan Pavithran\u2020","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Op Eds&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/merger-1-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/merger-1-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/merger-1-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/merger-1-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/merger-1-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":271865,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/18\/nclat-time-taken-for-preparation-of-the-certified-copy-of-the-order-judgment-excluded-for-limitation-under-section-61-of-the-insolvency-bankruptcy-code-2016\/","url_meta":{"origin":306794,"position":5},"title":"NCLAT | Time taken for preparation of the certified copy of the order\/judgment excluded for limitation under Section 61 of the Insolvency &#038; Bankruptcy Code, 2016","author":"Editor","date":"August 18, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal: Dismissing a time-barred appeal, the Principal Bench of National Company Appellate Tribunal comprising of Ashok Bhushan, J. and Barun Mitra held that the power to condone the delay cannot be exercised exceeding 15 days. The Appellant filed an appeal on 08-07-2022 against the order of\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":"NCLAT","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/306794","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\/67512"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=306794"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/306794\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/306798"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=306794"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=306794"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=306794"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}