Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (Sep. 23) ruled that an order rejecting a review petition cannot be independently challenged, as it merely affirms the original order or decree. An aggrieved party must therefore contest the original order or decree itself, not the order rejecting the review.

When the review is dismissed, there is no merger of the original decree with the dismissal order. The Court explained :

“Whenever a party aggrieved by a decree or order seeks a review thereof based on parameters indicated in Section 114 read with Order XLVII, CPC and the application ultimately fails, the decree or order under review does not suffer any change. It remains intact. In such an eventuality, there is no merger of the decree or order under review in the order of rejection of the review because such rejection does not bring about any alteration or modification of the decree or order; rather, it results in an affirmance of the decree or order. Since there is no question of any merger, the party aggrieved by the rejection of the review petition has to challenge the decree or order, as the case may be, and not the order of rejection of the review petition.”, the court said.

“On the contrary, if the petition for review is allowed and the suit or proceedings is placed for rehearing, Rule 7(1) permits the party aggrieved to immediately object to the order allowing the review or in an appeal from the decree or order finally passed or made in the suit, i.e., after rehearing of the matter in dispute.”, the court added.

A bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice KV Viswanathan heard the case where two SLPs were filed, one against the rejection of review of the High Court's order, and another against the original order of the High Court.

The judgment authored by Justice Datta dismissed both SLPs, holding that one was not maintainable as it challenged only the rejection of the review, and the other was barred since it was re-filed after unconditional withdrawal of the earlier SLP without obtaining leave to re-file.

Cause Title: SATHEESH V.K. VERSUS THE FEDERAL BANK LTD.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 934

Click here to read/download the judgment

Also From Judgment: Second Special Leave Petition Not Maintainable If First SLP Against Same Order Was Withdrawn Unconditionally : Supreme Court