https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457048 The HC dismissed the review applications, upholding its original judgment. It ruled that the revision petitions were barred by limitation, as the computation of the 30-day period did not include unauthorized vehicle operations without fixed timings. The court emphasized that review powers under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC are limited to correcting errors apparent on the record and not for rehearing cases. The arguments regarding constructive knowledge and the legality of grants exceeding 4 kms were rejected, as they were deemed irrelevant once the petitions were time-barred. en-us Thu, 29 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Sep 2024 17:27:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457048 The HC dismissed the review applications, upholding its original judgment. It ruled that the revision petitions were barred by limitation, as the computation of the 30-day period did not include unauthorized vehicle operations without fixed timings. The court emphasized that review powers under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC are limited to correcting errors apparent on the record and not for rehearing cases. The arguments regarding constructive knowledge and the legality of grants exceeding 4 kms were rejected, as they were deemed irrelevant once the petitions were time-barred. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 29 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457048