Review Petition Fails to Meet Requirements, Dismissed by Court: Justice K. Babu Emphasizes ‘Criteria Under Which a Review May Be Entertained
In a significant ruling, the Honourable Mr. Justice K. Babu of the High Court dismissed a review petition against the original judgment in O.P.(DRT) No. 350/2023. The judgment, dated 31st October 2023, was focused on issues related to the SARFAESI Act and the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to ascertain the nature of land involved.
Justice Babu was unequivocal about the grounds under which a review petition can be entertained. Quoting the judgment, he stated, “A review may be entertained based on criteria like the discovery of new evidence, errors apparent on record, or any other sufficient reason.”
The review petitioner had sought the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to determine if the property in question was agricultural land, as per Section 31(i) of the SARFAESI Act. Justice Babu said that while the review petition was dismissed, the petitioner still has the option to “seek a stay on proceedings under the SARFAESI Act till the application for the appointment of Commissioner is considered.”
The case also witnessed citations from several key judgments and was represented by prominent advocates, R.Suraj Kumar, N.G. Sindhu, Anjana R.S., Sunil J. Chakkalackal for the review petitioner, and Sri. Mohan Jacob George S.C. for the respondents.
Legal experts suggest that this ruling reiterates the strict conditions under which review petitions will be considered, thereby setting a precedent for future cases.
The court’s decision is expected to have a broad impact, particularly on proceedings under the SARFAESI Act and the approach of the Debts Recovery Tribunal in similar matters.
The judgment has already started receiving attention from legal circles and is expected to be cited in future cases involving review petitions.
Date of Decision:31 October 2023
ROSAMMA TONY VS THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.REGD
