S. MURALI SUNDARAM versus JOTHIBAI KANNAN & ORS

S. MURALI SUNDARAM versus JOTHIBAI KANNAN & ORS

The Supreme Court held that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction by treating the review as a rehearing and by reconsidering a survey report it had already considered and discarded when deciding the main writ petition; an erroneous judgment on merits is not a ground for review under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC and must be challenged by appeal, therefore the High Court's order allowing review was quashed and the earlier writ judgment was restored.

Parties
Appellant: S. Murali Sundaram; Respondent: Jothibai Kannan & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
24 February 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / On Appeal From High Court Judgment and Order Dated 29.06.2021 (review Application)
Outcome
Appeals allowed in part
Legal Topics
Review Under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC, Scope of Review Jurisdiction, Error Apparent on the Face of Record, Appeal Versus Review
Civil Procedure Review Under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC Scope of Review Jurisdiction Error Apparent on the Face of Record Appeal Versus Review

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S. Murali Sundaram

Appellant

Jothibai Kannan & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / On Appeal From High Court Judgment and Order Dated 29.06.2021 (review Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court was justified in allowing the review application under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC read with Section 114 CPC and setting aside its earlier reasoned judgment
  2. 2 Whether the High Court could reconsider and rely upon a survey report in the review which it had earlier discarded while deciding the main writ petition

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction by treating the review as a rehearing and by reconsidering a survey report it had already considered and discarded when deciding the main writ petition; an erroneous judgment on merits is not a ground for review under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC and must be challenged by appeal, therefore the High Court's order allowing review was quashed and the earlier writ judgment was restored.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in part

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order dated 29.06.2021 of the High Court (Review Application No.21 of 2017) quashed and set aside
  • Judgment and order dated 03.03.2017 passed in Writ Petition (MD) No.8606 of 2010 restored