In short. A review petition in Delhi High Court asks the same bench that decided your case to correct its own judgment, on narrow grounds: an error apparent on the face of the record, new and important evidence you could not find earlier despite due diligence, or another sufficient reason of the same kind. It is not a second appeal. This guide is for parties to civil cases, writ petitions and appeals decided by the High Court. File within 30 days of the judgment. Most reviews are decided within weeks to a few months. Read the judgment closely first.
Is this your situation?
- The High Court's judgment records a fact wrongly, such as a date, an amount or a concession you never made.
- The judgment overlooks a statutory provision or a binding Supreme Court decision that decides the case.
- You have found a document that you could not trace during the case despite genuine efforts.
- Your writ petition was dismissed on a ground that was never argued or put to you.
- The judgment decides a point against you without dealing with a submission recorded in the order sheet.
- You are unsure whether to file a review, an appeal or a petition in the Supreme Court.
Key points
- A review goes back to the same judge or bench. It is a request to correct an obvious mistake, not a fresh hearing on merits.
- File within 30 days. Article 124 of the Limitation Act gives 30 days from the judgment; delay needs a separate application and a good explanation.
- Point to an error you can show in a sentence. If it takes a long argument to show the mistake, it is not an error apparent on the face of the record.
- Keep the Supreme Court clock in mind. A pending review does not automatically stop the 90 days for a special leave petition from running.
- Criminal judgments are different. A criminal court cannot review its final judgment except to correct clerical or arithmetical errors.
What is a review petition in Delhi High Court?
A review petition in Delhi High Court is an application to the bench that passed a judgment or order, asking it to reconsider and correct that decision on limited grounds. The power comes from Section 114 and Order 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 in civil matters. In writ petitions, the High Court, as a court of record under Article 215 of the Constitution, has an inherent power to review its own orders, and it applies the same principles as Order 47.
The key word is 'limited'. A review is not an appeal. The judge does not re-weigh the evidence or decide whether a different view was possible. The Supreme Court in Parsion Devi v. Sumitri Devi (1997) put it plainly: a review petition cannot be 'an appeal in disguise'. If the judgment is merely wrong in the sense that another judge might have decided differently, the remedy is an appeal, not a review.
That does not make review useless. Judges are human, files are large and hearings are short. A judgment that records the wrong date of a notice, treats a document as missing when it is on record at page 147, or overlooks a statutory provision that settles the point can be corrected quickly by review, often faster and more cheaply than an appeal to a Division Bench or the Supreme Court.
Review is also available against interim and final orders, against orders in Letters Patent Appeals, first and second appeals, revisions and original side suits. The procedure is broadly the same; what changes is which bench hears it.
The three grounds for an Order 47 review
Order 47 Rule 1 allows a review on three grounds. The first is the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence, was not within your knowledge or could not be produced when the decision was made. Both parts matter. The document must be important enough to change the result, and you must show that you genuinely looked for it and could not find it. A document that was in your own cupboard or available in a public office you never checked will not qualify.
The second is a mistake or error apparent on the face of the record. This is the ground most review petitions rely on, and it is discussed in the next section.
The third is 'any other sufficient reason'. Courts read this narrowly, as meaning a reason of a kind similar to the first two, not any reason that persuades the litigant. Examples accepted over the years include a judgment passed without hearing a party who was entitled to be heard, a decision based on a concession the advocate had no authority to make, and an order passed on a misunderstanding of what was actually argued.
The Explanation to Rule 1 adds an important limit: the fact that the legal principle on which the judgment rests has later been reversed or modified by a superior court's decision in another case is not a ground for review. If the Supreme Court changes the law six months after your judgment, review does not reopen it.
What counts as an error apparent on the face of the record?
An error apparent on the face of the record is one that is self-evident, that strikes you on reading the record without a long process of reasoning. The Supreme Court in Meera Bhanja v. Nirmala Kumari Choudhury (1995) described it as an error so obvious that no court would allow it to stand. If you need to argue for an hour, or build a chain of inferences, to show the mistake, it is not an error apparent.
Examples that have qualified: the judgment proceeds on a fact that is plainly contrary to the record, such as holding a suit time-barred by taking the wrong date of a document; it overlooks a statutory provision that squarely governs the case; it relies on a judgment that had already been overruled before the decision; it records a concession that the order sheet shows was never made; or it fails to deal with a ground that was argued and would have decided the case.
Examples that usually do not: the court did not give enough weight to a document; it preferred one line of judgments over another; it took a view of the evidence that you consider wrong. These are errors of judgment, if errors at all, and belong in an appeal.
The Supreme Court summarised the principles in Kamlesh Verma v. Mayawati (2013), including that a review cannot be used to reargue the case, to raise points not raised before, or because a party has engaged new counsel with a fresh approach. Delhi High Court benches apply these principles closely.
The provisions that govern review
Section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1, CPC
Any person aggrieved by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed but has not been preferred, or from which no appeal is allowed, may apply for review to the court that passed it, on the three grounds described above.
Order 47 Rules 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9, CPC
The court may reject the review if there is no sufficient ground; it cannot grant it without notice to the other side (Rule 4). The review is heard by the same judge or judges if available (Rule 5). An order rejecting review is not appealable (Rule 7). If review is granted, the matter is reheard (Rule 8). No review lies against an order on a review application (Rule 9).
Article 124, Limitation Act 1963
Thirty days from the date of the decree or order for a review application in a civil court. Section 5 allows delay to be condoned for sufficient cause.
Articles 215 and 226, Constitution of India
The High Court as a court of record has power to review its own judgments in writ proceedings, exercised on principles similar to Order 47.
Section 403, BNSS 2023 (old Section 362 CrPC)
Once a criminal court has signed its judgment or final order, it cannot alter or review it except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error. This bars review of criminal judgments of the High Court on merits.
Review, appeal, LPA or Supreme Court: choosing the right remedy
Before filing a review, decide whether it is the right remedy at all. If the judgment was passed by a single judge in a writ petition or on the original side, a Letters Patent Appeal to a Division Bench may be available, and an appeal allows a full challenge on merits. Our page on Letters Patent Appeals against a single judge explains when it lies. If the judgment was in an RFA or RSA, Section 100A bars a further appeal within the High Court, leaving review and the Supreme Court.
Order 47 Rule 1 allows a review where an appeal lies but 'has not been preferred'. If you have already filed an appeal against the same judgment, review is generally not available, subject to the Explanation for cases where another party's appeal is pending on different grounds. Once an appellate court decides the matter on merits, the lower judgment merges into the appellate one and review of the original judgment is generally not available.
The Supreme Court question is more delicate. If an SLP against the High Court's judgment has already been dismissed, whether a review can still be filed in the High Court depends on how the Supreme Court worded its dismissal; Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala (2000) is the leading case on the doctrine of merger. And while a review is pending, the 90-day period for filing an SLP keeps running. The Supreme Court often entertains an SLP against both the main judgment and the order dismissing review, but delay is examined. Our guide on going to the Supreme Court from a Delhi High Court judgment explains that route.
A rough rule from practice: where the mistake is factual and obvious, file a review quickly. Where the disagreement is about how the law or evidence should be applied, an appeal or SLP is usually the right route, and a review only adds delay.
Which bench hears your review petition?
Order 47 Rule 5 requires a review to be heard by the same judge or judges who passed the judgment, if they are still available in the court. So a review of a single judge's writ judgment goes back to that judge, and a review of a Division Bench judgment goes to the same two judges. This is the whole logic of review: the judge who wrote the decision is best placed to see whether something was overlooked.
If the judge has retired, been transferred or elevated, the review goes to the bench that now holds the relevant roster. That bench applies the same narrow test and is, if anything, more cautious about disturbing a colleague's judgment.
Reviews are registered in the Delhi High Court with their own number linked to the main case, for example a review petition in a W.P.(C), RFA or LPA. The listing follows the roster; if the original bench is sitting in a different combination, the Registry places the matter before it as directed. This is a private law firm website; for official listing and case status, use the Delhi High Court's own website.
How to file a review petition, step by step
The steps below apply to a civil or writ review in the Delhi High Court. Start the moment you receive the judgment, because 30 days pass quickly.
Get the judgment and the order sheets
Download the judgment from the court's website or get a certified copy, and collect the order sheets of all hearings. The order sheets often show what was argued or conceded, which matters if the judgment records it differently.
Pin down the error in one paragraph
Write down, in plain words, what the judgment says, what the record shows, and why the difference changes the result. If you cannot do this in one paragraph with page references, reconsider filing.
Check limitation and alternatives
Count 30 days from the judgment. At the same time, check whether an LPA or SLP is available and what its deadline is, and decide which to file first.
Draft the review petition
State the grounds precisely, refer to the page and paragraph of the record that shows the error, and attach the new evidence, if that is the ground, with an affidavit explaining why it could not be found earlier.
Add applications as needed
Add an application for condonation of delay if late, and an application for stay of the judgment if its operation will cause serious harm before the review is decided.
E-file and serve
File through the Delhi High Court's e-filing system with the vakalatnama, affidavit and court fee, and serve an advance copy on the other side's counsel as the practice requires.
First listing
The bench reads the review and may dismiss it at once, or issue notice to the other side. If notice is issued, the other side files a reply and the review is argued.
Rehearing if review is allowed
If the review is allowed, the original matter is restored and reheard on the point, or the judgment is corrected or modified in the review order itself.
Time and cost for a review petition
| Stage | Typical time | Court fee and costs in general terms |
|---|---|---|
| Reading the judgment and record | 1 to 2 weeks | Certified copy charges if needed |
| Filing within limitation | Within 30 days of the judgment | A modest court fee for a review petition; check the current schedule |
| Curing Registry objections and first listing | 1 to 4 weeks after filing | No additional fee |
| Dismissal at first hearing or notice issued | At the first or second listing | Costs can be imposed on a frivolous review |
| Reply and hearing after notice | A few weeks to several months | Lawyer's fees agreed in writing stage by stage |
| Rehearing if review allowed | Depends on the court's board | As for the original matter |
Documents for a review petition
The decision
- Copy of the judgment or order under review, certified where required
- Order sheets of all hearings in the case
- Written submissions or notes filed by both sides
The record that shows the error
- Pages of the paper book showing the overlooked document, date or fact
- Copy of the statutory provision or binding judgment that was missed
- Transcript or note of any concession recorded wrongly, with the order sheet
For new evidence
- The new document, with its source
- Affidavit explaining when and how it was found and what searches were made earlier
- Proof of those earlier searches, such as RTI applications or letters to offices
For filing
- Vakalatnama and supporting affidavit
- Application for condonation of delay, if late
- Application for stay, if needed
- Court fee
What happens at the hearing
The first hearing is short. The judge has usually read the review petition and the judgment and wants to know, quickly, where the error is. Counsel should go straight to the page of the record and the paragraph of the judgment, show the contradiction, and stop. A long opening on the merits often leads to dismissal with the comment that the petitioner is rearguing the case.
If the bench sees no ground, it dismisses the review, often in a short order. Under Order 47 Rule 7, that order is not appealable, though an SLP may be filed against the main judgment and the review order together. If the bench sees a possible error, it issues notice, because Rule 4 does not allow a review to be granted without hearing the other side.
When Advocate B.K. Singh argues a review, he hands up a single page showing the judgment's sentence on one side and the record's contrary entry on the other. Judges respond to an error they can see in thirty seconds; that one page often decides whether notice is issued.
If the review is allowed, the court may correct the judgment in the review order itself, or recall the judgment and list the original matter for fresh hearing. A review that is allowed does not mean you have won the case; it means the case, or the affected point, will be decided again.
Does filing a review stop the judgment from operating?
No. A pending review does not by itself suspend the judgment. If the judgment requires you to vacate premises, pay money or hand over documents, the other side can enforce it unless the court orders otherwise. If you need protection, file an application for stay with the review petition and ask for it at the first listing.
Benches grant a stay in review only where the error looks real and serious harm would follow from immediate enforcement. A stay is less likely where the review appears to reargue merits. If you also intend to approach the Supreme Court, a stay from that court may be the more realistic protection.
Reviews in writ petitions and criminal cases
In writ petitions, which make up a large part of the Delhi High Court's work, the review power is inherent rather than statutory, but the court applies the Order 47 standards. Reviews in writ matters are common where a judgment overlooks a government circular, a recruitment rule or an earlier order in the same case. Government departments also file reviews, sometimes after long delays, and courts expect them to explain the delay properly like any private party.
A person who was not a party but is directly affected by a writ judgment, for example a candidate whose selection is upset by an order passed without hearing him, may seek review with leave of the court. The usual question is why he did not apply to be impleaded earlier.
Criminal judgments are a different matter. Section 403 of the BNSS (old Section 362 CrPC) bars a criminal court from altering or reviewing its signed judgment or final order except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error. So a High Court judgment dismissing a criminal appeal or a quashing petition on merits cannot be reviewed; the remedy is the Supreme Court. Orders passed without hearing a party, or procedural orders, are sometimes recalled, but that is a narrow exception. Our guide on restoring a case dismissed for non-prosecution covers the different remedy where a matter was dismissed because no one appeared.
When a review is not worth filing
Some judgments should not be reviewed, even when the client is sure they are wrong. If the judge considered your argument and rejected it with reasons, however brief, a review asking him to reconsider will almost certainly fail. The same is true where the judgment rests on two independent grounds and your complaint touches only one: correcting that error would not change the result.
A review also makes little sense where time is the real enemy. If the other side is about to enforce a decree for possession or money, a review that sits for weeks without a stay protects nothing, while an appeal or SLP with an interim application may. And where the judgment turns on findings of fact drawn from oral evidence, review rarely helps, because the error is seldom visible on the face of the record.
There is a cost in credibility too. A weak review, dismissed with sharp observations, can make the later Supreme Court challenge harder, because the respondent will rely on the review order to show that the High Court looked at the matter twice. A frank conversation about whether the error is apparent, and whether it matters to the outcome, saves money and preserves the stronger remedy.
A made-up example: the overlooked notice date
Here's a made-up example. Neha, a school teacher in East Delhi, files a writ petition challenging the termination of her contract service. A single judge dismisses it, holding that she approached the court more than three years after her termination and that the delay is unexplained. The judgment records the termination date as 2021.
Neha's termination order, which is at page 32 of the paper book, is dated 2023, and the petition was filed in 2024. The 2021 date was the date of her original appointment, which the judgment mixed up. Within three weeks, her lawyer files a review petition pointing to page 32, attaching the order sheet showing no argument on delay was even raised by the department.
The judge issues notice, hears the department, recalls the judgment and lists the writ petition for fresh hearing on merits. This is the kind of mistake review exists for: obvious from the record, decisive for the result, and correctable without an appeal. Had Neha's complaint instead been that the judge took a wrong view of her service rules, review would not have been the remedy; an LPA would.
Mistakes people make with review petitions
- Rearguing the merits. A review that repeats the original arguments in different words is dismissed, sometimes with costs.
- Missing the 30 days while deciding. If you are unsure, file the review in time; a late review needs a convincing explanation.
- Forgetting the SLP deadline. The 90 days for the Supreme Court do not stop while the review is pending.
- Filing review after an appeal. Once you have appealed against the same judgment, review is generally not available.
- Relying on later case law. A later Supreme Court judgment changing the law is expressly excluded as a ground.
- Vague grounds. 'The court failed to appreciate' is not an error apparent; point to the exact page and paragraph.
What to do this week
Read the judgment line by line against the record and the order sheets, and mark every factual statement you can check. Note the date of the judgment and count 30 days. Ask your lawyer for a written view on whether there is a genuine error apparent, and on whether an LPA or SLP would serve you better.
Advocate B.K. Singh often reminds clients that a review petition in Delhi High Court is decided by the same judge, so its tone matters: it should point out the error respectfully and precisely, not accuse the court. A short, clear review is more likely to get a hearing than a long, angry one.
Our page on review of a Delhi High Court judgment explains how the firm handles reviews, and our guides on first and second appeals and Letters Patent Appeals cover the alternatives. For filing, see our note on e-filing in the Delhi High Court.
If you think a judgment in your case contains an obvious error, you can contact Advocate B.K. Singh for advice on your judgment and papers, or for updates on the law on review. Details of the service are on our review petition page.
Frequently asked questions
Can I file a review petition after 30 days?
Yes, but you must file an application for condonation of delay explaining each period of delay. Courts condone short, honestly explained delays more readily than long or vague ones. Do not let the review delay also cost you the Supreme Court deadline.
Will a different judge hear my review?
Ordinarily no. Order 47 Rule 5 requires the same judge or judges to hear it if available. A different bench hears it only if the original judge has retired, been transferred or is otherwise unavailable.
Can I file a review and an SLP at the same time?
It is possible, but you cannot ordinarily pursue both on the same point indefinitely. Many lawyers file the review first where the error is factual and obvious, and keep the SLP deadline in view. Decide the strategy at the start, because the Supreme Court looks at how time was spent.
Is there an appeal against dismissal of a review petition?
No appeal lies against an order rejecting review under Order 47 Rule 7. You can challenge the main judgment, and the review order with it, before the Supreme Court by special leave petition within the time allowed.
Can I review a Delhi High Court bail order?
Criminal orders cannot be reviewed on merits because of Section 403 BNSS (old Section 362 CrPC). If bail is refused, you can file a fresh application on changed circumstances or approach the Supreme Court. Clerical mistakes in the order can be corrected.
Can a review petition be filed by a new lawyer?
Yes, but courts are wary when a new lawyer seeks to present the case differently. A review must point to an error in the judgment, not a new line of argument. Mention any change of counsel openly and keep the review to the record.
Does the other side get to respond to my review?
Yes, if the court is inclined to consider it. Order 47 Rule 4 forbids granting a review without notice to the opposite party. If the review is dismissed at the first hearing, no notice is needed.
Can a review petition lead to costs against me?
Yes. Courts sometimes impose costs where a review petition is plainly an attempt to reargue or delay. A focused review on a real error rarely attracts costs, even if it is dismissed.
Advocate B.K. Singh
Founder of B.K. Singh & Associates. MCA, LL.B., LL.M. More than twenty years in practice before the Supreme Court, the Delhi High Court, Delhi district courts and tribunals. This guide was written and reviewed by his team.
This guide explains the law in general terms and is not legal advice. For advice on your own papers, contact the team.
Related guides
PropertyWhich Property Cases Go Directly to Delhi High Court?
Which property disputes start in the Delhi High Court: suits above Rs 2 crore, probate, DDA and MCD writs, RERA and rent appeals. Where the rest...
PropertyHow to File a Partition Suit in Delhi
How a partition suit in Delhi is filed, which court hears it, how the preliminary and final decree work, court fee basics, time ranges and papers to...
PropertyCan a Daughter Claim a Share in Her Father's Property?
Can a daughter claim a share in her father's property? Ancestral and self-acquired property, Vineeta Sharma, wills, release deeds and partition in...
PropertyHow to Stop a Family Member From Selling Joint Property
A co-owner cannot sell the whole family property. How to stop sale of joint property in Delhi with an injunction, notices and a partition suit, step...
PropertyIs Probate Mandatory in Delhi?
Probate is not legally required for most wills in Delhi, but banks, DDA and buyers may still ask for it. When to get probate, which court, time and...
PropertyHow Long Does Probate Take in Delhi High Court?
How long probate takes in Delhi High Court and district courts: stage-wise time, citations, objections, court fee, NRI heirs and what speeds things...