Why 'Review' is infamous?
Is it doubt, ego, KRA of Hon Court? or Does applicant have no faith, conviction to retry case in the same Honorable judge?
Is it KRA
Is it linked to KRA of the Hon. judge? (then this KRA should be removed)
Does KRA depends on 'How many No. of Orders a Hon. Judge reversed, after review'?
Then no Hon. Judge would even look at the review.
Is it Ego
If facts and circumstances of case are such that a party cudn't think to produce evidence but was able to produce one as well as new evidences come forth.
If there is no imputation on the court.........but slight imputation is always there.....Doesn't the hon court take it positively?
Is it lack of conviction in one's own case or doubt on judiciary?
Especially in Family court maint interim orders aare liable to vary from courts to court in the same family court.....as it contains a lot of discretion also.....
But would it not be better to ask court to relook in the light of new evidences(if any) as well as "new way of looking at the scenario"?
I had read an article by Ex-solicitor General Soli Sorabjee. He wrote that Hon Judges are supposed to nod to suggest approval/disapproval while arguments, which gives 'a clue to pleader whether the Hon Court has baught his view pointor not' .............................and if the Hon Court hasn't yet baught his view point he can go on further to explian in even greater details ..........................................instead of receiving it as a surprise 'at the time of dictation' of the order and knowing very late about 'what impression that the Hon Court had formed after argument '.
Clever tactic to be used by defendent in maint case 'initial trail' and 'subsequent review' is that....
I believe one needs to make plea about facts but show your enability to produce evidence!!!! and withhold some crucial material evidence!!!!......and let the honorable court narrow down on the opinion ... and then in review ensure that you provide that crucial evidence after permission of court as if it was a startling disclosure one was unaware of!!!!!!
This tactic is required.... because otherwise any how the Hon Court is going to award the maint to wife......so keep crucial evidence with you which is liable to weaken the wife's side...and then disclose it at the time of review and get the maint either reduced or quashed!!!!
Just lay calm as python.....
What do you think of this approach??
Please comment your views.....
