SC Rejects Review Liberty as Subsequent Judgments Are Not Grounds for Review

Union of India & Ors. Vs Virendra Amrutbhai Patel (Supreme Court of India)

The Supreme Court dismissed the review petition and declined to grant liberty to seek review of matters decided on the basis of the judgment in Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. The Court expressly disagreed with the observations made by a three-Judge Bench in Union of India vs. M/s Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. [RP(C) No.359 of 2023 in CA No.5783 of 2022], particularly paragraph 7, which had granted liberty to aggrieved parties to seek review where proceedings had been disposed of by relying upon the original Ganpati Dealcom judgment.

The Court held that the earlier decision in Government of NCT of Delhi vs. KL Rathi Steels Limited [(2024) 7 SCC 315], delivered by another three-Judge Bench on 17.05.2024, governed the issue. The judgment in KL Rathi Steels Limited had arisen from a difference of opinion between two Judges and had accepted the view of Justice Nagarathna. That decision relied upon the Explanation to Rule 1 of Order XLVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

The Court reproduced the Explanation to Rule 1 of Order XLVII, which provides that reversal or modification of a legal position by a subsequent decision of a superior court in another case shall not constitute a ground for review of an earlier judgment. Applying this principle, the Court observed that the Bench deciding the review petition in Ganpati Dealcom had failed to notice the prior judgment in KL Rathi Steels Limited, despite both decisions being rendered by Benches of co-equal strength.