- - NC: 2025:KHC:2824 RP No. 505 of 2016 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM REVIEW PETITION NO.505 OF 2016 BETWEEN: SRI. VISHWANATH V.R. S/O LATE V.H. RANGASWAMY, NO.543, 3RD MAIN, 'A' BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 010. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VISHWANATH V R., PARTY-IN-PERSON, (ABSENT)) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-01 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT D.C.OFFICE, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560009. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU - 560 009. 4. THE SPECIAL THASILDHAR BENGALURU NORTH (ADDL.) TALUK, YELHANKA Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: High Court of Karnataka - - NC: 2025:KHC:2824 RP No. 505 of 2016 2 BENGALURU - 560 064. 5. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR ARKERE CIRCLE, HESARGATTA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH (ADDL.) TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 064. 6. SRI. HANUMANTHRAYAPPA S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS (FOSTER SON OF GIRIYAMMA AND LATE THIMMAIAH) R @ SILVER OAK RESORT COMPOUND, ADDEVISHWANATHAPURA VILLAGE, ARKERE POST, BENGALURU - 562 130. 7. SRI. SOMASHEKHARA REDDY S/O LATE MUNISHAMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RAJANKUNTE VILLAGE, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI BENGALURU - 560 064. 8. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BENGALURU RURAL, MILLERS ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 052. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R6 AND R8; R5 SERVED) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE 1 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO REVIEW AND WITHDRAW THE ORDER DATED 28/09/2016 AFTER - - NC: 2025:KHC:2824 RP No. 505 of 2016 3 CONSIDERING MISCHIEVOUS FALSE AFFIDAVIT DATED 15/12/2014 AND MISCHIEVOUS SYNOPSIS OF RESPONDENT NO.7 IN WRIT PETITION NO.58193/14, ACCORDINGLY DIRECT THE AGGRIEVED MISCHIEVOUS RESPONDENT NO. 7 THROUGH RESPONDENT NO.6 TO APPROACH NECESSARY JURISDICTIONAL CIVIL COURT WITH THEIR GRIEVANCES IF ANY, WHEN THIS HON'BLE COURT WAS INTENTIONALLY MISLEAD (WHEN THERE BEING NO JURISDICTION) IN TAKING UP THE MATTER AFTER THE VERY ORDER DATED 28/02/2014 WHICH WAS IN QUESTION IN THE WRIT PETITION NO. 58193/14 AND AFTER THE SAME BEING IMPLEMENTED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 ON 08/02/2014 ITSELF COPY AT ANNEXURE-"B & B"; AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This review petition is filed by party-in-person assailing the order passed in W.P.No.58193/2014. 2. Though notice was ordered through Registry to appear before the committee, party-in-person has not chosen to appear before the committee. Even there is no - - NC: 2025:KHC:2824 RP No. 505 of 2016 4 representation on two dates. This review petition is filed in 2016. It appears that petitioner - party-in-person is not interested in prosecuting this review petition. 3. Be that as it may, no valid grounds are raised to fulfil the ingredients of Order XLVII Rule 1 of CPC. It is a trite law that the Court cannot under the cover of review arrogate to itself the power to decide the case afresh. Parties who have suffered a decree cannot persuade to reassess the evidence. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ramu Sahu(Dead) Through LRs and others .vs. Vinod Kumar Rawat and Others1 has clearly held that review proceedings has to be strictly confined to the ambit of Order XLVII Rule 1 of CPC. In the present review petition, the review petitioner has failed to point out mistake apparent on the face of the record. An error which is not self-evident and has to be detected by a process of reasoning, can hardly be said to be an error 1 2020 SCC Online SC 896 - - NC: 2025:KHC:2824 RP No. 505 of 2016 5 apparent on the face of the record warranting interference by invoking the power of Order XLVII of CPC. 4. Perusal of the order which is now sought to be reviewed, the coordinate Bench has only set aside the order and the matter is remitted back for fresh consideration. There is no adjudication of rights in the present captioned petition. It is only a remand order. Even on this count, this review petition is not maintainable. 5. Accordingly, review petition is dismissed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 71