Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a civil suit filed by the respondent on 11.01.1985 for declaration and permanent injunction, which was decreed by the trial court on 26.08.2003. The appellant challenged this decree through various appeals, culminating in a second appeal that was allowed on 30.01.2019. Following this, the respondent filed a review petition on 12.02.2019, which was admitted by the High Court. The appellant subsequently filed a Miscellaneous Civil Application on 16.07.2019, requesting that the review be heard by the same judge who had delivered the original judgment. This application was rejected by Justice Prithviraj K. Chavan. The appellant contended that the review should be heard by the same judge under the provisions of Order 47 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and cited relevant amendments and rules applicable to the Bombay High Court. The respondent argued that the review should be heard by the judge assigned to the Goa Bench, as the original judge was no longer sitting there. The court found that the matter was primarily about the interpretation of the rules rather than factual disputes. It concluded that the application should have been referred to the Chief Justice for administrative assignment, thus allowing the appeal and setting aside the impugned order. The court directed the registry to place the application before the Chief Justice for appropriate orders.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Review Application - Jurisdiction of Judges - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order 47 Rule 5 - The court held that the review application should have been placed before the Chief Justice for assignment rather than being dealt with by a single judge, as per the provisions of the rules. The court emphasized the importance of procedural propriety in handling review applications (Paras 15-16).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the review petition should be heard by the same judge who passed the original order or another judge.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order dated 16.07.2019, and directed the registry of the High Court to place the application before the Chief Justice for appropriate orders.
Law Points
- Review application
- jurisdiction
- administrative side
- interpretation of rules
- procedural propriety
