- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010676112025 NC: 2026:KHC:41880 RP No. 454 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REVIEW PETITION NO.454 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SMT PADMAMMA W/O LATE A.M. NARAYANASWAMY RAJU, AGE 74 YEARS, 2. SRI ANAND N. RAJU S/O LATE A.M. NARAYANASWAMY RAJU, AGE 53 YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT B.M. BYRASANDRA VILLAGE, B.M. KAVAL, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK – 560 040. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN KUMAR N.K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. R. JAYAMMA W/O LATE JAYARAMA RAJU, AGE 75 YEARS, R/AT NO.39, 4TH CROSS, MANJUNATHA COLONY, J P NAGAR, 2ND PHASE, BENGALURU – 560 078 2. SMT. J. JAYASHUBA D/O LATE JAYARAMA RAJU, AGE 47 YEARS, R/AT NO.39, 4TH CROSS, MANJUNATHA COLONY, J P NAGAR, 2ND PHASE, BENGALURU – 560 078 Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010676112025 NC: 2026:KHC:41880 RP No. 454 of 2025 3. SMT. SHREEDEVI W/O LATE JAYAHARI, AGE 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.1854, 37TH CROSS, 11TH MAIN, 4TH BLOCK, JAYANAGARA, BENGALURU – 560 078 4. SRI J. JAYARAMA S/O LATE JAYARAMA RAJU, AGED 42 YEARS, R/AT NO.39, 4TH CROSS, MANJUNATHA COLONY, J P NAGAR, 2ND PHASE, BENGALURU – 560 078 5. SRI M. ANANTHARAJU S/O LATE MUNISWAMY RAJU, AGE 73 YEARS, R/AT NO.55, MARENAHALLI, J P NAGAR, 2ND PHASE, BENGALURU – 560 078 6. SRI M SHIVANANDARAJU S/O LATE MUNISWAMY RAJU, AGE 71 YEARS R/AT NO.55, MARENAHALLI, JP NAGAR, 2ND PHASE, BENGALURU – 560 078 7. SMT. SHOBHA D/O LATE A M NARAYANASWAMYRAJU, AGE 52 YEARS, R/AT B M BYRASANDRA VILLAGE, B M KAVAL, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK – 560 040 8. SRI V M VISHWANATH S/O SRI MADEGOWDA, AGE 52 YEARS, R/AT VADDARAHALLI VILLAGE, CHOTTANAHALLI POST, MALAVALLI TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 430 - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010676112025 NC: 2026:KHC:41880 RP No. 454 of 2025 9. SRI S. GANGADHAR S/O LATE SIDDALINGAPPA AGE 58 YEARS R/AT KONANANKUNTE VILLAGE, KANAKAPURA ROAD BENGALURU – 560 062 10. SMT. KAMALA D/O SMT. VENKATAMMA AND SRI CHANGAMARAJU, AGE 55 YEARS MANJUNATHA COLONY J P NAGAR, 2ND PHASE, BENGALURU – 560 078 11. SMT. PUSHPA D/O SMT. VENKATAMMA & SRI CHANGAMARAJU AGE 53 YEARS MANJUNATHA COLONY, J P NAGAR 2ND PHASE BENGALURU – 560 078 12. SMT MAHALAKSHMI D/O LATE A M. KRISHNAM RAJU AGE 52 YEARS R/AT NO.66 21-A MAIN, MARENAHALLI, J P NAGAR 2ND PHASE BENGALURU – 560 078 13. SRI LAVA KUMAR S/O LATE A M KRISHNAM RAJU AGE 48 YEARS R/AT NO.66, 21-A MAIN MARENAHALLI, J P NAGAR 2ND PHASE, BENGALURU – 560 078 14. SRI M SRINIVASA RAJU S/O LATE MUNISWAMY RAJU AGE 75 YEARS R/AT NO.66, 1ST FLOOR J P NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 078 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. A. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. V.N. SHANKAREGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R2, R5 & R6; SRI. B.V. RAMAMURTHY, ADVOCATE FOR R9) - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010676112025 NC: 2026:KHC:41880 RP No. 454 of 2025 THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION114 R/W OF CPC, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.07.2025 IN RFA NO.923/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT, BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER This review petition is directed against the impugned judgment dated 16.07.2025 passed in RFA No.923/2018, whereby the said appeal preferred by the respondent Nos.1 to 5 was allowed by this Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the review petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the review petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record including the impugned judgment in the light of the decisions of the Apex Court in (i) Shri Ram Sahu vs. Vinod - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010676112025 NC: 2026:KHC:41880 RP No. 454 of 2025 Kumar Rawat – Civil Appeal No.3601/2020 dated 03.11.2020, (ii) S.Murali Sundaram vs. Jothibai Kannan – (2023) SCC Online SC 185 (iii) S.Madhusudhan Reddy vs. V.Narayana Reddy – Civil Appeal Nos.5503-04/2022 dated 18.08.2022 and the recent judgment of the Apex Court in the case of (iv) Sanjay Kumar Agarwal vs. State Tax Officer –2023 SCC Online SC 1406, wherein it is held as under:- 16. The gist of the afore-stated decisions is that:— (i) A judgment is open to review inter alia if there is a mistake or an error apparent on the face of the record. (ii) A judgment pronounced by the Court is final, and departure from that principle is justified only when circumstances of a substantial and compelling character make it necessary to do so. (iii) 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 apparent on the face of record justifying the court to exercise its power of review. (iv) In exercise of the jurisdiction under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC, it is not permissible for an erroneous decision to be “reheard and corrected.” (v) A Review Petition has a limited purpose and cannot be allowed to be “an appeal in disguise.” - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010676112025 NC: 2026:KHC:41880 RP No. 454 of 2025 (vi) Under the guise of review, the petitioner cannot be permitted to reagitate and reargue the questions which have already been addressed and decided. (vii) An error on the face of record must be such an error which, mere looking at the record should strike and it should not require any long-drawn process of reasoning on the points where there may conceivably be two opinions. (viii) Even the change in law or subsequent decision/judgment of a co-ordinate or larger Bench by itself cannot be regarded as a ground for review. 4. Upon consideration of the entire material on record, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment and decree nor does it suffer from any error apparent on the face of the record warranting interference by this Court under Section 114 r/w Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC, as held in the aforesaid judgments of the Apex Court. 5. In view of the foregoing reasons, the review petition is devoid of merits and the same is hereby dismissed. However, liberty is reserved in favour of the review petitioners to take recourse to such remedies as available in law as against the final judgment and decree dated 16.07.2025 passed in RFA - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010676112025 NC: 2026:KHC:41880 RP No. 454 of 2025 No.923/2018 as well as the present order subject to all just exceptions and defences available to the respondents. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13