Reliance On Wrong Precedent Renders Decision ‘Erroneous’, Can’t Be Corrected Under ‘Review Jurisdiction’: Allahabad High Court
CASE TITLE: M/S Vaid Organics and Chemical Industries Ltd. Lko. Thru. Its Director Swarn Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Industries U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others [CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION No. – 41 of 2023]
DECIDED ON: 31.07.2023
CORAM: Hon’ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon’ble Manish Kumar,J.
APPLICANT: – M/S Vaid Organics and Chemical Industries Ltd. Lko. Thru. Its Director Swarn Singh
OPPOSITE PARTY: – State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Industries U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others
COUNSEL FOR APPLICANT: – Piyush Kumar Agarwal,Akhilesh Kumar Kalra
COUNSEL FOR OPPOSITE PARTY: – Kartikey Dubey
INTRODUCTION:
While denying a review petition, the Allahabad High Court emphasized that a review cannot be granted solely based on the argument that the previous bench relied on an allegedly incorrect precedent from the Apex Court. The court clarified that review jurisdiction is only applicable when there is a clear and evident error on the record.
FACTS:
The Applicant received extensions to establish new industries, but they failed to meet the terms of the lease agreement. Consequently, UPSIDC terminated the lease. Subsequently, the Applicant contested the lease termination before the Allahabad High Court.
The Writ Court, basing its decision on the Supreme Court’s ruling in ITC Limited v. State of UP (2011), rejected the petition. The court observed that UPSIDC was established to promote industrialization, generate employment, and improve the economy. As the Applicant repeatedly failed to adhere to the lease agreement conditions despite receiving ample time extensions, it negatively impacted industrial development. Thus, the court upheld the validity of UPSIDC’s decision to terminate the lease.
CASE ANALYSIS AND DECISION:
The Court ruled that the Appellate Court has the authority to rectify an erroneous judgment made by the High Court. During a review, the Court’s focus is limited to identifying any evident errors present in the case record. If the Court has mistakenly based its decision on a Supreme Court judgment and committed an error in the order, such correction can be carried out in the Appellate jurisdiction rather than by a bench conducting a review of its own judgment.
Consequently, the termination of the allotment by UPSIDC was deemed valid, as the applicant held the property for seventeen years without undertaking any construction, development, or employment generation.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Mansi Malpani