Review jurisdiction cannot reopen merits absent apparent error; additional facts do not justify reconsideration.

A review application is maintainable only where it discloses an error apparent on the face of the record or another ground permitted under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC. New facts or a fresh appreciation of the same controversy cannot be used to reopen the merits of the earlier decision. On that basis, the Uttarakhand HC held that the review plea based on facts and the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 not previously brought to the Court's notice did not satisfy the review standard and was dismissed as not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the review application was maintainable on the ground that certain facts and the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 were not brought to the Court's notice earlier.

Analysis: The grounds urged in review did not disclose any error apparent on the face of the record or any other ground permitted for review under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. A review cannot be used to reopen the merits of the earlier decision merely because a party seeks to rely on additional facts or a different appreciation of the same controversy.

Conclusion: The review application was not maintainable and was dismissed.

---