Review jurisdiction under Order XLVII Rule 1 is confined to analogous grounds; a death before judgment could not justify review.

Review jurisdiction under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC is confined to the express grounds in the rule, and the phrase "any other sufficient reason" is limited to reasons analogous to discovery of new matter, new evidence, or error apparent on the face of the record. A party's death before judgment did not fall within those permitted grounds, so the subordinate court had no jurisdiction to review its decree on that basis. The review order was therefore without jurisdiction, and the later affirming decree was set aside, with the original decree restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether the subordinate court had jurisdiction to review its decree on the ground that the party in possession had died before judgment and, if not, whether the subsequent decrees could stand.

Analysis: The power of review under Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, read with Order XLVII, Rule 1, is confined to the grounds expressly stated in the rule. The words "any other sufficient reason" do not confer an unrestricted power; they are limited to reasons analogous to the specified grounds such as discovery of new matter or evidence, or error apparent on the face of the record. Death of a party before delivery of judgment was not a ground falling within those categories, and the review could not be supported on that basis.

Conclusion: The review was without jurisdiction and was wrongly granted.

Final Conclusion: The review order and the later affirming decree were set aside, and the original decree was restored.

Ratio Decidendi: The phrase "any other sufficient reason" in Order XLVII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is limited to reasons analogous to the enumerated grounds, and a court cannot grant review on a ground outside that confined jurisdiction.

---