Estate Officer, Huda v. Himanshu Coop. Group Housing Soc. Ltd. And ANR.
RA No.45-CII of 2017 (O&M) in -1FAO No.3778 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RA No.45-CII of 2017 (O&M) in FAO No.3778 of 2014 Date of Decision.06.04.2017 Estate Officer, HUDA, Panchkula ........Petitioner Vs Himanshu Coop. Group Housing Society Ltd. and another ........Respondents
Present:
Mr. R.D. Bawa, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL -.- AMIT RAWAL J.(ORAL) C.M. No.7378-CII of 2017 For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 391 days in filing the review application is condoned.
Application is allowed.
RA No.45-CII of 2017 The review application tantamounts to re-agitating of the grounds of appeal which is not permissible in view of the ratio decidendi culled out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Tamilnadu Terminated Full Time Temporary LIC Employees Association Vs. S.K. Roy, The Chairman, Life Insurance Corporation of India and another" 2016 (9) SCC 366. The relevant paragraph of the judgment reads as under:- ''Review is not re-hearing of an original matter. The power of review cannot be confused with appellate power which enables a superior court to correct all errors committed by a subordinate court. A repetition of old and overruled argument is not enough to re-open concluded adjudications. This Court, in Jain Studios Ltd. v. Shin Satellite Public Co. Ltd. (2006) 5 SCC 501, held as under: PANKAJ KUMAR 2017.04.07 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
RA No.45-CII of 2017 (O&M) in -2FAO No.3778 of 2014
11. So far as the grievance of the applicant on merits is concerned, the Learned Counsel for the opponent is right in submitting that virtually the applicant seeks the same relief which had been sought at the time of arguing the main matter and had been negatived. Once such a prayer had been refused, no review petition would lie which would convert rehearing of the original matter. It is settled law that the power of review cannot be confused with appellate power which enables a superior court to correct all errors committed by a subordinate court. It is not rehearing of an original matter. A repetition of old and overruled argument is not enough to reopen concluded adjudications. The power of review can be exercised with extreme care, caution and circumspection and only in exceptional cases.''
In view of the aforementioned observation, I do not find any error apparent on the face of record, much less, no ground is made out for interference and accordingly, the present review application stands dismissed.
(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE April 06, 2017 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No PANKAJ KUMAR 2017.04.07 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document