https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466409 The Supreme Court reiterates that review jurisdiction is limited to narrow grounds such as discovery of new evidence, mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, or other sufficient reason; an error apparent justifies review and undermines finality. The Court found non-consideration of High Court Full Bench reasoning and reliance on stare decisis to be an error apparent on the record, which warranted recalling the earlier judgment; the review petition was therefore allowed and the prior judgment recalled. The decision addresses interplay between state acquisition, modification or extinguishment of rights, and vesting tied to change of possession in consolidation and surplus land redistribution. en-us Thu, 16 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Feb 2026 10:39:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466409 The Supreme Court reiterates that review jurisdiction is limited to narrow grounds such as discovery of new evidence, mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, or other sufficient reason; an error apparent justifies review and undermines finality. The Court found non-consideration of High Court Full Bench reasoning and reliance on stare decisis to be an error apparent on the record, which warranted recalling the earlier judgment; the review petition was therefore allowed and the prior judgment recalled. The decision addresses interplay between state acquisition, modification or extinguishment of rights, and vesting tied to change of possession in consolidation and surplus land redistribution. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466409