Mohammad Yaqoob Wani vs Union Territory Of Jk & Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 1239 j&K/2

                                                                     Serial No. 02
                                                                   Regular Cause List


       HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                      AT SRINAGAR


                                                        CM No. 5556/2021 in
                                                            RP No. 83/2021
Mohammad Yaqoob Wani
                                                             ... Petitioner(s)
                                Through: -
                    Mr Altaf Haqani, Senior Advocate with
                        Mr Shakir Haqani, Advocate.
                                     V/s
Union Territory of JK & Anr.
                                                            ... Respondent(s)

Through: -

Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG.

CORAM:

Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge Hon'ble Mr Justice Sanjay Dhar, Judge (ORDER) 05.10.2021 Per Magrey, J (Oral);

CM No. 5556/2021:

01. This application is filed on behalf of the applicant/ Petitioner

seeking condonation of delay that has occasioned in the filing of the

accompanying Review Petition, being RP No. 83/2021, against the Judgment

dated 22nd of September, 2020 passed in SWP No. 822/2003.

02. On the set of facts and the grounds urged, coupled with

submissions made at the Bar, the instant application is allowed and the delay

in filing the Review Petition is condoned. Review Petition is taken on board

today itself. CM disposed of accordingly.

RP No. 83/2021:

03. By this motion, the applicant/ Petitioner is seeking review of

Judgment dated 22nd of September, 2020 passed in SWP No. 822/2020; in

terms whereof the Petition of the applicant/ Petitioner stands dismissed.

04. We have heard the learned Senior Counsel representing the

applicant/ Petitioner and have considered the matter.

05. At the outset, what requires to be stated is that in the instant

Review Petition, the applicant/ Petitioner has touched the merits of the case,

which, in a Review Petition, is unwarranted as per well settled position of law.

The grounds urged in the Review Petition have already been decided and

findings returned thereon by this Court and, if the applicant/ Petitioner was

aggrieved of the said findings, he ought to have availed the remedy under law

for challenging the same before the appropriate Court. In fact, the instant

Review Petition, on grounds enumerated therein, appears to be a disguised

appeal. The grounds taken by the applicant/ Petitioner are either that the

findings recorded by the Court are not legally tenable, or that the same are

perverse, or that the same are unacceptable. A judgment may be wrong,

erroneous, incorrect, perverse, legally untenable, etcetera, etcetera, but, the

only course available for the aggrieved party is to go in appeal against the said

Judgment before the appropriate forum. Such grounds do not constitute errors

of fact or of law on the face of the record as would call for a review.

06. A review cannot also be used as a tool for changing the opinion/

view of the Court. In a Review Petition, it is only an error, apparent on the

face of the record, which can be considered and gone into by the Court. It is

not open to the Court, dealing with review of its decision, to re-appreciate the

evidence and reach a different conclusion, even if that is possible. Conclusion

arrived at, on appreciation of evidence and after hearing the rival parties,

cannot be assailed in a Review Petition, unless it is shown that there is an error

apparent on the face of the record. The power of review is exercised when

some mistake or error, apparent on the face of the record, is found. A mistake

or an error, apparent on the face of the record, means a mistake or an error

which is, prima facie, visible and does not require any detailed examination.

Such an error must strike one on mere looking at the record and should not

require any long-drawn process of reasoning on the points where there may,

conceivably, be two opinions. In the present case, the applicant/ Petitioner has

not been able to point out any error, apparent on the face of the record, but,

on the contrary, under the guise of the instant Review Petition, the applicant/

Petitioner is challenging the Judgment passed by this Court which is under

review.

07. Given the above position, we do not find any error, apparent on

the face of the record, in the Judgment dated 22nd of September, 2020 passed

by this Court in SWP No.822/2003, as would warrant its recall on review. It

being so, this Review Petition is found to be without any merit, as a sequel thereto, same shall stand dismissed, along with any connected CM(s). Interim

direction(s), if any subsisting as on date, shall stand vacated.

                                 (Sanjay Dhar)                (Ali Mohammad Magrey)
                                     Judge                             Judge
           SRINAGAR
           October 5th, 2021
           "TAHIR"




TAHIR MANZOOR BHAT
2021.10.05 15:30
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document