review

gud decision reminded. thanx.

Raj kumar ji,

Please clarify my doubt as follows:

If Application for ‘Review and Re-hearing’ of the assailed Order is granted, it doesn’t automatically mean that ‘ Order is reversed/rescinded and Reviewent's plea in the matter was transposed’, it only says that ‘Review Application’ has merits so that matter be re-heard and the matter be re-adjudicated again…. considering the all the new disclosures, evidences, proofs and cogent reasons for not filing earlier etc  …that’s it!!!

…..and It may happen that (although very unlikely and rare), during review and re-hearing of the matter, the hon. court may come to same previous conclusion as before!!!!!

Why I am saying “unlikely and rare”?...because the process of ‘re-hearing’ is granted, in the first place, only when …..There are 99% (good chances) of ‘reversing/rescinding’  the impugned order and in favour of  Review-Applicant or Reviewent.

Hence, unless the "Review Petition" implies the re-trial summarily, review is not granted in the first place.

Then why isn't 'it regarded as a set-aside petition?

Why one is supposed to file Writ Petition in upper court (as appeal not allowed because we call it review and a not set-aside application)

Provisions of review are for the interest of justice and nothing else and an ad Interim order is not a ‘writing on the wall’, if cogent circumstances are brought to the notice of  the Hon. court with honesty.