Review under Order 47 cannot be used to reopen concluded matters or introduce withheld documents without sufficient reason.

Review under Order 47 is confined to an error apparent on the face of the record or other sufficient reason, and it cannot be used to reopen a concluded matter or introduce documents that should have been produced earlier. The petitioners had already litigated the factual and notice issues, their earlier challenge had failed before the apex court, and no convincing explanation was given for the long delay in producing the documents. On those facts, the request to receive additional documents in review was not permitted and the review was rejected as not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the review petition could be entertained for receiving additional documents under Order 47 and whether any error apparent on the face of the record or sufficient reason was shown to justify review.

Analysis: Review under Order 47 is confined to cases where an error apparent on the face of the record is demonstrated. The matter had already been adjudicated on the factual matrix and on the notice issue, and the earlier challenge had also not succeeded before the apex court. The petitioners had not produced the documents at any earlier stage despite the long pendency of the original proceedings, and no convincing reason was shown for that omission. In these circumstances, the request to receive documents in review could not be permitted and no ground for reopening the concluded matter was made out.

Conclusion: The review petition was not maintainable on the grounds urged and was rightly rejected.

---