Review Under Code of Civil Procedure (CPC)
Under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908, the review process allows parties to seek a reconsideration of a court's judgment or order. This process is detailed in Section 114 and Order XLVII of the CPC. Essentially, it lets the same court that made the original decision revisit it if there are grounds to believe that the judgment was flawed or if new, significant information has come to light.
The review mechanism ensures that justice is not only done but also seen to be done, by providing a way to correct genuine mistakes or address important new evidence.
Section 114: Basis for Filing a Review
Section 114 of the CPC lays out the foundational grounds on which a review can be sought. It permits an aggrieved party to request a re-examination of a decree or order from the court that made it under the following conditions:
1. Appealable Decrees or Orders: If a decree or order is subject to appeal but no appeal has been filed, a review can be requested.
2. Non-Appealable Decrees or Orders: If no appeal is allowed, an aggrieved party may still seek a review.
3. Decisions on Small Causes References: Decisions made by a court of small causes that are referred to a higher court can also be reviewed.
Order XLVII: Detailed Procedure and Grounds
Order XLVII of the CPC outlines the specific procedural rules and grounds for review:
• Rule 1: It stipulates that a review application must be made to the same court that issued the original decree or order. The grounds for review are:
1. Discovery of New Evidence: If new and significant evidence is discovered that was not available despite due diligence at the time the decree was made, it can be a basis for review. This evidence must be crucial and should have likely influenced the original decision.
2. Mistake or Error Apparent on the Face of the Record: This includes clear and obvious errors in the judgment or order, whether factual or legal. The error must be evident without the need for extensive reasoning.
3. Other Sufficient Reasons: This is a more flexible ground allowing for review based on other significant reasons that are analogous to the two main grounds. The reasons must be compelling enough to warrant a reconsideration of the decree or order.
Application for Review
To apply for a review, the following conditions must be met:
• The applicant must be a person directly affected by the decree or order. This includes parties to the case or others who can show a legitimate interest in the outcome.
• The application must be made to the same court that rendered the original decision.
Restrictions and Bar on Review
Certain limitations are imposed on the review process:
• Rule 9 of Order XLVII: Precludes reviews of orders made on review applications or decrees/orders passed after a review. Essentially, you cannot review a review decision or make a second review of a decree.
Case Laws
Several landmark cases have clarified and interpreted the review process:
1. Sow Chandra Kante v. Sheikh Habib (1975): The Supreme Court emphasized that the purpose of Section 114 is not to provide a second chance for parties to argue their case but to correct genuine errors and prevent miscarriages of justice.
2. Northern India Caterers Ltd. v. Governor of Delhi (1980): The Court highlighted that review proceedings are not meant to re-hear cases afresh but to address glaring mistakes or omissions.
Conclusion
The review mechanism under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) is a vital component of the civil judicial system, intended to uphold the accuracy and fairness of court decisions. It provides a structured process for rectifying errors or addressing significant new evidence that may have affected the outcome of a case. While this mechanism offers a necessary check to correct genuine mistakes or incorporate new information, it operates within a framework of specific procedural rules and restrictions to prevent abuse. By adhering to these guidelines, the review process maintains the integrity of the judicial system and ensures that reviews are conducted in a manner that is both fair and just.
