Review jurisdiction is limited; SARFAESI auction purchaser is not liable for the judgment debtor's arbitral debt.

Review jurisdiction under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC is limited to discovery of new material, an apparent error on the face of the record, or analogous sufficient reason, and it cannot be used to reargue the appeal. Applying that standard, the challenge failed because the court found no ground to revisit the appellate judgment. On the substantive issue, the secured assets sold under SARFAESI included hypothecated movables, but the section 31(b) exception did not apply since the movables were not pledged within section 172 of the Contract Act. The auction purchaser was therefore not saddled with the judgment debtor's arbitral award debt, and the review application was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the review applicant had disclosed any ground warranting review of the appellate judgment, particularly on the question whether the purchaser of the secured assets in a SARFAESI auction could be made liable to satisfy the judgment debtor's arbitral award debt.

Analysis: Review under Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is confined to discovery of new and important matter, apparent error on the face of the record, or analogous sufficient reason. A review cannot be used to reargue the appeal or to correct an allegedly erroneous view on merits. On the substantive point, the Court found that the secured assets sold under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 included hypothecated movables, and that the exception in section 31(b) did not apply because the movables were not pledged within the meaning of section 172 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The Court further held that the sale conditions did not fasten the judgment debtor's money liability on the auction purchaser, and that the earlier appellate finding that the purchaser had no obligation to discharge the judgment debtor's debts was correct.

Conclusion: No ground for review was made out. The review application was liable to be dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Review cannot be granted to reopen a concluded appeal on the basis of a merely debatable or alleged erroneous view of law, and an auction purchaser of secured assets does not incur the judgment debtor's monetary liabilities merely because the assets were sold under SARFAESI.

---