[Landmark Judgement] State of Orissa v/s Nakula Sahu (1979)

Landmark Judgment Law Insider (1)

Published on: 28 November 2022 at 09:22 IST

Court – Supreme Court of India

Citation – State of Orissa v/s Nakula Sahu (1979) 1 SCC 328

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that it is a well settled principle that revisional jurisdiction is to be exercised only in exceptional cases when there is a glaring defect in the procedure or there is a manifest error on the point of law which has consequently resulted in miscarriage of justice. The revisional court is not expected to act as if it is hearing an appeal.

Para – 10

This takes us to the consideration of the second point. In relation to this point, it may be observed that nothing has been brought to our notice on behalf of the respondents to indicate that there was any glaring defect in the procedure adopted by the lower courts or that there was a manifest error on a point of law in the judgments and orders passed by them which had resulted in flagrant miscarriage of justice which needed to be set right by the High Court.

Para – 11

A scrutiny of the evidence which we have made at the request of the counsel for the parties shows that there was not even any mis-appreciation of evidence on the record by the lower courts which could be said to have resulted in gross failure of justice warranting interference by the High Court.

Drafted By Abhijit Mishra

Key Words – Revisional Court, Justice, Miscarriage of Justice.

Related Post