Rule 1 of CPC : Rule 1: Application for review of judgment.

Explanation using Example

Example 1:

Rajesh owns a small business in Mumbai. He was involved in a civil lawsuit with a supplier over a contract dispute. The court issued a decree in favor of the supplier, ordering Rajesh to pay a significant amount of money. Rajesh did not appeal the decision within the allowed time frame. However, a few months later, Rajesh discovered new evidence—an email from the supplier that was not available during the trial, which could potentially change the outcome of the case. Rajesh, feeling aggrieved by the decree, decides to apply for a review of the judgment under Rule 1 of Order XLVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, citing the newly discovered evidence as the reason for the review.

Example 2:

Meera was involved in a property dispute with her neighbor in Chennai. The court issued an order in favor of her neighbor, and Meera did not appeal the decision. Later, Meera realized that there was a clerical error in the court's order—the property boundaries mentioned in the order were incorrect. Meera believes this mistake is apparent on the face of the record and applies for a review of the judgment under Rule 1 of Order XLVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to correct the error.

Example 3:

Anita, a resident of Delhi, was involved in a civil case regarding a loan dispute. The court issued a decree against her, and she did not appeal. However, Anita later learned that the legal principle on which the judgment was based had been overturned by a higher court in a different case. Despite this, Anita cannot use this change in law as a ground for review of the judgment under Rule 1 of Order XLVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as the explanation explicitly states that such a change in law is not a valid ground for review.

Example 4:

Vikram, a respondent in a civil case in Bangalore, did not appeal the court's decree against him. However, another party in the same case did file an appeal. Vikram believes there was a significant error in the court's judgment that affected him. He applies for a review of the judgment under Rule 1 of Order XLVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, even though an appeal is pending by another party. Since the grounds for the appeal are not common to both Vikram and the appellant, Vikram's application for review is considered valid.