The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line on review petitions, clarifying that an order rejecting a review cannot be taken up as a standalone challenge. If the review fails, the only path left for an aggrieved party is to attack the original decree or order itself.
The ruling came from a bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice KV Viswanathan, which dealt with two special leave petitions—one targeting a High Court’s dismissal of a review, and another aimed at the original order. Both petitions met the same fate: dismissal.
Justice Datta, who authored the judgment, underscored that a dismissal of review does not alter or replace the original decree. Instead, it merely affirms it. Since no “merger” takes place between the original decree and the order rejecting review, the latter cannot be independently assailed.
The Court explained: when a review petition collapses, the decree under scrutiny remains untouched. The only remedy available is to question that decree directly, not the review dismissal order.
By contrast, the bench clarified, if a review is allowed and the case is reopened, the opposing party can immediately object to the order allowing review or raise challenges once the final decree emerges after rehearing.
In the case at hand, one SLP fell because it challenged nothing more than the review rejection. The second failed because it was re-filed after the earlier SLP had been unconditionally withdrawn, with no permission granted to revive it.