Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC - Application for Review of Judgment
Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) sets out when a person aggrieved by a decree or order may ask the court that made it to review its decision. Review is a narrow corrective remedy, not a second appeal.
Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC - Statutory Provision
Rule 1 - Application for review of judgment
(1) Any person considering himself aggrieved—
(a) by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed, but from which no appeal has been preferred,
(b) by a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed, or
(c) by a decision on a reference from a Court of Small Causes,
and who, from the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence was not within his knowledge or could not be produced by him at the time when the decree was passed or order made, or on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record or for any other sufficient reason, desires to obtain a review of the decree passed or order made against him, may apply for a review of judgment to the Court which passed the decree or made the order.
(2) A party who is not appealing from a decree or order may apply for a review of judgment notwithstanding the pendency of an appeal by some other party except where the ground of such appeal is common to the applicant and the appellant, or when, being respondent, he can present to the Appellate Court the case on which he applies for the review.
Explanation. The fact that the decision on a question of law on which the judgment of the Court is based has been reversed or modified by the subsequent decision of a superior Court in any other case, shall not be a ground for the review of such judgment.
Meaning and scope of review under the CPC
A review permits the court that passed the decree or made the order to reconsider it only within the limited grounds prescribed by law. Section 114 and Order XLVII must be read together. A review cannot ordinarily be used to rehear the whole dispute merely because a party disagrees with the conclusion.
Grounds for filing a review application
1. Discovery of new and important matter or evidence
The material must be significant and must have been unavailable to the applicant despite due diligence when the decree or order was made. Evidence that could reasonably have been produced earlier does not become a review ground simply because it is now convenient to rely on it.
2. Mistake or error apparent on the face of the record
An apparent error is one that is self-evident from the record without an elaborate argument or a fresh evaluation of disputed facts or law. A possible alternative interpretation, by itself, is generally a matter for appeal rather than review.
3. Any other sufficient reason
This expression covers a legally sufficient reason analogous to the grounds expressly specified in the rule. It is not an unrestricted power to reopen a concluded judgment.
Who can apply for review?
Rule 1 covers a person aggrieved by an appealable decree or order where no appeal has been preferred, a decree or order from which no appeal lies, or a decision on a reference from a Court of Small Causes. A person seeking review must show how the decision adversely affects their legal interests and identify a recognised review ground.
Review when another party has filed an appeal
Under sub-rule (2), a party who has not appealed may seek review even while another party's appeal is pending, subject to the express exceptions: a common ground of appeal, or the ability of the applicant as respondent to present the review case to the appellate court. The procedural posture of the appeal matters.
Time limit for filing a review petition
Article 124 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963 generally prescribes 30 days from the date of the decree or order for review by a court other than the Supreme Court. Statutory exclusions, condonation provisions and the nature of the proceeding may affect the calculation. Reviews in the Supreme Court and reviews under constitutional writ jurisdiction may be governed by distinct rules and principles.
Procedure for an application for review
- Identify the decree or order, the court that passed it and the precise ground under Order XLVII Rule 1.
- Prepare a review application stating the apparent error, new evidence with due diligence particulars, or other sufficient reason.
- File the application in accordance with Order XLVII Rule 3, the applicable court rules, limitation requirements and prescribed court fees.
- The court considers whether sufficient grounds exist under Rule 4. Notice to the opposite party is required before review is granted; strict proof is required where new evidence is relied upon.
- If review is granted, the matter proceeds as directed under Order XLVII Rule 8.
Related provisions and practical distinctions
Section 114 CPC: statutory provision enabling review by the court that passed the decree or order. Order XLVII Rule 3: form of review applications. Rule 4: rejection or grant of applications and safeguards. Rule 5: hearing before the relevant judge or judges. Rules 6 and 7: decisions by multiple judges and appealability. Rules 8 and 9: rehearing following grant and the bar on certain further applications.
Review versus appeal: an appeal permits scrutiny by an appellate forum within its jurisdiction; review asks the same court to correct a qualifying defect. Review versus revision: revision under Section 115 CPC is a distinct, restricted supervisory remedy, subject to its statutory conditions.
Effect of a later judgment changing the law
The Explanation to Order XLVII Rule 1 expressly states that a later superior-court decision reversing or modifying a legal proposition in another case does not, by itself, justify review of an earlier judgment. The actual grounds raised must still satisfy the review jurisdiction.
Official legislation and judgments
Read the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (India Code, official PDF), the Bombay High Court CPC legislation archive and a Supreme Court judgment discussing Section 114 and Order XLVII Rule 1.
Note: This article describes the central CPC framework. State amendments, High Court rules and case-specific procedural requirements should be checked before filing.