Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Bebe Bai Vs. State

Bebe Bai vs State

Disposition Petition dismissed Court Rajasthan Decided Jul 16, 1999
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/769099

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
D.B. Civil Review Petition No. 2410 of 1998
Subject
Civil
Disposition
Petition dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Section 114--Review--Scope--Only error apparent on the face of the record can be corrected in review--Error which is not self-evident and detectable only on a process of reasoning cannot be corrected in review petition--A review petition cannot be allowed to be used as an appeal in disgu...

Key legal issue
Civil
Outcome / disposition
Petition dismissed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bebe Bai

Advocate Mr. Goyal

Respondent

State

Legal References

Reported In
2000(1)WLC355; 1999(1)WLN666

Excerpt

civil procedure code, 1908 - section 114--review--scope--only error apparent on the face of the record can be corrected in review--error which is not self-evident and detectable only on a process of reasoning cannot be corrected in review petition--a review petition cannot be allowed to be used as an appeal in disguise. ;review petition dismissed - - law on this point is very clear and well settled.b.j. shethna, j.1. this bench is specially assembled today for this type of cases. the petitioner is an old lady of nearly aged 67 years. this review petition is under defects. there are five defects. mr. goyal learned counsel for the petitioner assures this court that the defects will be removed within two weeks from today. on that condition shri goyal was heard on review petition.2. the attempt of mr. goyal was to argue the matter as if it is an appeal against our own judgment. law on this point is very clear and well settled.3. the order can be highly erroneous, illegal or wrong. but that is not the scope of the review petition. the judgment may be open to review inter-alia if there is a mistake or an error apparent on the face of the record, but when error which is not self-evident and has to be detected by a process of reasoning, an erroneous decision is not permissible to be reheard and corrected. the review petition has a limited purpose and cannot be allowed to be used as an appeal in disguise.4. hence, this review petition is rejected.

Full Judgment

B.J. Shethna, J.

1. This Bench is specially assembled today for this type of cases. The petitioner is an old lady of nearly aged 67 years. This review petition is under defects. There are five defects. Mr. Goyal learned Counsel for the petitioner assures this Court that the defects will be removed within two weeks from today. On that condition Shri Goyal was heard on review petition.

2. The attempt of Mr. Goyal was to argue the matter as if it is an appeal against our own judgment. Law on this point is very clear and well settled.

3. The order can be highly erroneous, illegal or wrong. But that is not the scope of the review petition. The judgment may be open to review inter-alia if there is a mistake or an error apparent on the face of the record, but when error which is not self-evident and has to be detected by a process of reasoning, an erroneous decision is not permissible to be reheard and corrected. The review petition has a limited purpose and cannot be allowed to be used as an appeal in disguise.

4. Hence, this review petition is rejected.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial