Observations By Coordinate Bench No Ground To Review A Judgment : Supreme Court Lays Down 8 Principles On Scope Of Review


1 Nov 2023 6:50 AM GMT


Ongoing Enrollments:
Certificate Course in Labour Laws Certificate Course in Drafting of Pleadings Certificate Programme in Train The Trainer (TTT) PoSH Certificate course in Contract Drafting Certificate Course in HRM (Human Resource Management) Online Certificate course on RTI (English/हिंदी) Guide to setup Startup in India HR Analytics Certification Course

Observations made by a coordinate bench about a judgment cannot be a ground to review it, said the Supreme Court while dismissing review petitions filed against the 2022 judgment in State Tax Officer v. Rainbow Papers Ltd 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 743.

In Rainbow Papers, a bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee (since retired) and AS Bopanna held that a resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 cannot be sustained if it ignored statutory dues to the Government.

The petitioners who sought review of Rainbow Papers relied on the observations made by a coordinate bench in Paschim Anchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited vs. Raman Ispat Private Limited and Others 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 534 to the effect that Rainbow Papers did not notice the 'waterfall mechanism' in Section 53 of IBC.

Refusing to accept this argument, a bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and Bela Trivedi held that the observations of a coordinate bench cannot be a ground to review the judgment.

"Any passing reference of the impugned judgment made by the Bench of the equal strength could not be a ground for review," the bench stated.

The bench observed “It is a well settled proposition of law that a co-ordinate Bench cannot comment upon the discretion exercised or judgment rendered by another co-ordinate Bench of the same strength. If a Bench does not accept as correct the decision on a question of law of another Bench of equal strength, the only proper course to adopt would be to refer the matter to the larger Bench, for authoritative decision, otherwise the law would be thrown into the state of uncertainty by reason of conflicting decisions.”

Moreover, the Court held that the petitioners had failed to demonstrate any mistake or error apparent on the face of the record in the impugned judgment, and they had not met the parameters laid down by the Court in various decisions for reviewing judgments.

Referring to various precedent, the Court summarised the several key principles to prevent review petitions from becoming "appeals in disguise”-

Case title: Sanjay Agarwal v. State Tax Officer

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 939

Click here to read the judgment

%>