Debangana Ray
Published on August 1, 2022 at 17:41 IST
The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that under the provision mentioned in Order XLVII Rule 9 of CPC, a review of an order of the review petition is not maintainable.
A second review application is barred under the provision of CPC. The Bench comprising of Chief Justice Ravi Malimath and Justice Vishal Mishra laid down the differences between Article 226 of the constitution and Order XLVII Rule 1 of CPC.
The judgement was passed under a petition which was dismissed against which a review petition was filed which too was dismissed. After the dismissal of the two petitions, a third instant review petition was filed.
In the petition, the petitioners relied on judgements such as Shivdev Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab, State of MP v. Jaswantpuri and Ors. And Lakhanlal v. the state of MP.
The court was informed by the State about the provision under Order XLVII Rule 9 CPC, according to which a second review petition is not maintainable.
This contention was accepted by the court in its judgement. Further, the court added that,“The proceedings in this matter have been initiated and contested under various provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure.
“Therefore, without going into the same, it is suffice to hold that if the contention of the petitioner is to be accepted with reference to Section 141 of the CPC, then all the previous proceedings will be a nullity. Apparently, such a submission, therefore, cannot be accepted.”
Therefore, the review petition was dismissed.