In Brief
A daughter sought to amend a preliminary decree in a partition suit to claim equal coparcenary rights under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005. The trial court dismissed her plea; a High Court civil revision allowed it. On review, the High Court reversed the revision order and remanded the case. The Supreme Court held that the High Court's review order exceeded its jurisdiction by reappreciating facts and reversing findings as if in appeal, rather than correcting an error apparent on the face of the record. Review jurisdiction is limited and distinct from appellate power. The Court set aside the review order and restored the earlier civil revision decision, directing the trial court to proceed expeditiously.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.