https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457075 Review jurisdiction under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC is confined to correcting an error apparent on the face of the record, discovery of new and important matter, or other sufficient reason. It cannot be used to re-argue the case, seek a different view on merits, or operate as an appeal in disguise. On the facts stated, the grounds raised showed only a request for reconsideration and did not disclose any patent mistake in the earlier order. The review petition was therefore not maintainable on the basis urged, and the earlier order remained undisturbed. en-us Wed, 25 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Sep 2024 20:04:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457075 Review jurisdiction under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC is confined to correcting an error apparent on the face of the record, discovery of new and important matter, or other sufficient reason. It cannot be used to re-argue the case, seek a different view on merits, or operate as an appeal in disguise. On the facts stated, the grounds raised showed only a request for reconsideration and did not disclose any patent mistake in the earlier order. The review petition was therefore not maintainable on the basis urged, and the earlier order remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 25 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457075