Order XLVII Rule 4 CPC - When a Review Application Is Rejected or Granted
Order XLVII Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 governs the court's decision to reject or grant an application for review of a judgment, decree or order. It also protects the opposite party's right to notice and requires strict proof when review is sought on newly discovered material.
Text of Order XLVII Rule 4 CPC
Rule 4 - Application where rejected
(1) Where it appears to the Court that there is not sufficient ground for a review, it shall reject the application.
(2) Application where granted. Where the Court is of opinion that the application for review should be granted, it shall grant the same:
Provided that-
(a) no such application shall be granted without previous notice to the opposite party, to enable him to appear and be heard in support of the decree or order, a review of which is applied for; and
(b) no such application shall be granted on the ground of discovery of new matter or evidence which the applicant alleges was not within his knowledge, or could not be adduced by him when the decree or order was passed or made, without strict proof of such allegation.
Meaning and scope of Rule 4
Rule 4 describes two possible outcomes at the initial review stage. Under sub-rule (1), the court must reject an application if no legally sufficient ground for review is established. Under sub-rule (2), the court may grant review where the statutory requirements are met, subject to the safeguards in the provisos.
Review is not a second appeal. A court does not reopen a concluded case merely because a party disagrees with its reasoning or wants the same issues argued again. The permissible grounds are primarily found in Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC, read with Section 114 CPC.
When will a review application be rejected?
The court rejects a review application if it finds no sufficient ground within the review jurisdiction. Common reasons include an attempt to reargue the merits, reliance on evidence that could have been produced with due diligence, or a claimed error that requires extensive reconsideration rather than being apparent on the face of the record.
Whether a particular contention is reviewable depends on the governing statutory provisions, binding precedent and the facts of the case.
Conditions for granting review
1. Previous notice to the opposite party
Proviso (a) requires the court to give the opposite party prior notice and an opportunity to appear and support the decree or order. An application for review cannot be granted without this procedural safeguard.
2. Strict proof of newly discovered evidence
Under proviso (b), an applicant relying on newly discovered matter or evidence must strictly establish the claim that the material was previously unknown or could not be produced when the original decision was made. This requirement operates alongside the due-diligence condition in Order XLVII Rule 1.
3. Sufficient ground under the CPC
The court must be satisfied that a recognized ground for review exists. Such grounds include discovery of new and important matter or evidence despite due diligence, an error apparent on the face of the record, or another sufficient reason within the legal meaning of Rule 1.
What happens after review is granted?
Granting the application for review does not necessarily mean the original decree or order is immediately reversed. The court proceeds in accordance with the review procedure, including Order XLVII Rule 8, which addresses registration of a granted application and rehearing.
Rules concerning review before a bench of two or more judges, appeals and further review applications appear in the other provisions of Order XLVII.
Limitation for an application for review
Article 124 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963 generally prescribes 30 days for an application for review of judgment by a court other than the Supreme Court, computed from the date of the decree or order. Applicable exclusions, condonation principles and court-specific rules must be considered. Supreme Court review proceedings are governed by their own procedural framework.
Official legal sources
For the current statutory text and amendments, consult the India Code official legislation portal for the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and the Limitation Act, 1963. Court-specific filing and procedural rules should also be checked on the relevant court's official website.
Frequently asked questions
Can a review application be granted without hearing the opposite party?
No. Order XLVII Rule 4(2)(a) requires previous notice enabling the opposite party to appear and be heard before the review application is granted.
Is discovery of new evidence enough by itself?
No. The applicant must satisfy the legal requirements, including due diligence under Rule 1 and strict proof under Rule 4(2)(b).
Does granting review automatically set aside the original decision?
No. Granting review opens the way for the court to deal with the matter under the applicable review and rehearing procedure.
Legal information only. Verify applicable amendments, court rules and case law before filing.