Review Petition in Bangladesh: When Can a Court Judgment Be Reviewed?
A review petition in Bangladesh is a legal remedy through which a court may reconsider its own judgment or order in limited circumstances. It is not an ordinary appeal and cannot generally be used simply because a party believes that the court reached the wrong conclusion.
The law recognizes review primarily where there is a new and important matter or evidence, an error apparent on the face of the record, or another legally recognized sufficient reason. The scope of review depends on the court involved and the applicable law.
For the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh, the constitutional basis of review is Article 105 of the Constitution. Civil review before subordinate courts is principally governed by Section 114 and Order XLVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). The High Court Division also has specific review procedures under the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (High Court Division) Rules, 1973.
What Is a Review Petition in Bangladesh?
A review petition is an application asking the same court that delivered a judgment or order to reconsider it on legally recognized grounds.
The purpose of review is to correct a limited category of mistakes or consider matters that could not properly have been placed before the court earlier. It is therefore fundamentally different from an appeal.
The Supreme Court of Bangladesh has repeatedly emphasized that a review is not an appeal in disguise and is not ordinarily an opportunity to reopen a case for a fresh hearing simply because a party is dissatisfied with the result.
Constitutional Basis of Review in Bangladesh
Article 105 of the Constitution of Bangladesh provides that:
“The Appellate Division shall have power, subject to the provisions of any Act of Parliament and of any rules made by that division to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it.”
This means that the Appellate Division can review its own judgments and orders, subject to applicable legislation and its procedural rules.
The Supreme Court's official jurisdiction information also confirms that Order XXVI of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (Appellate Division) Rules, 1988 deals with the power and procedure of review.
Review Under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
For civil proceedings, Section 114 CPC provides the statutory basis for review.
Section 114 permits a person considering himself aggrieved to apply for review in specified circumstances, including where:
an appeal is allowed but has not been preferred;
no appeal is allowed; or
the matter concerns a decision on a reference from a Court of Small Causes.
The application is made to the court that passed the decree or order.
Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC sets out the principal grounds on which review may be sought.
Grounds for Review in Bangladesh
The main grounds can be understood under three broad categories.
1. Discovery of New and Important Matter or Evidence
A review may be sought where a party discovers new and important matter or evidence which:
was not within the party's knowledge when the judgment or order was made; or
could not have been produced despite the exercise of due diligence.
The requirement of due diligence is important. A party generally cannot withhold evidence and later use its existence as a reason for review.
The Supreme Court has recognized that genuinely new evidence may, in appropriate circumstances, have relevance to a review where it could not reasonably have been obtained during the original or appellate proceedings.
2. Error Apparent on the Face of the Record
Another important ground is a mistake or error apparent on the face of the record.
This does not mean every possible legal or factual mistake.
The Supreme Court has explained that an apparent error should be sufficiently obvious that it can be identified without an elaborate process of reasoning or extensive reargument.
For example, an obvious clerical or patent legal error may potentially fall within this category.
By contrast, where correcting the alleged error would require the court to conduct a lengthy reconsideration of competing arguments, evidence and interpretations, the matter may be more appropriately characterized as an appeal rather than a review.
3. Any Other Sufficient Reason
Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC also refers to “any other sufficient reason.”
This does not give a party an unrestricted right to reopen a concluded case. Courts interpret this ground within the established principles governing review jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court has emphasized that review jurisdiction cannot be used merely to obtain another opportunity to argue a case that has already been finally decided.
What Does “Error Apparent on the Face of the Record” Mean?
This is one of the most important concepts in review proceedings.
An error may be considered apparent where the mistake is obvious and self-evident from the record, rather than something that requires a detailed rehearing.
The Supreme Court has described the relevant principle as one where the error can be identified without elaborate argument and represents a clear point of law.
Examples That May Be Relevant
Depending on the circumstances, an apparent error may include:
an obvious mathematical or clerical mistake;
an accidental omission;
a patent error in the record;
an obvious legal error that requires no extensive reargument.
What Is Generally Not an Apparent Error?
A party normally cannot establish a review simply by arguing:
“the court misunderstood my evidence”;
“the judge should have believed my witness”;
“another interpretation of the law is possible”; or
“the court should reach a different conclusion.”
If deciding the alleged error requires a full rehearing, the matter may fall outside the ordinary scope of review.
Review Is Not the Same as Appeal
One of the most important distinctions in Bangladesh law is between appeal and review.
| Issue | Appeal | Review |
|---|---|---|
| Basic purpose | Challenge a decision before an appellate court | Ask the same court to reconsider on limited grounds |
| Scope | Generally broader, depending on statute | Narrow |
| New evidence | May be considered according to applicable law | Must satisfy specific requirements |
| Reappraisal of case | May be available within appellate jurisdiction | Generally not permitted merely because the party disagrees |
| Error correction | Broader appellate powers | Limited to recognized review grounds |
| Court | Usually a higher appellate court | Generally the court that passed the judgment/order |
The Supreme Court has repeatedly stated that review should not become a substitute for an appeal.
Review Petition Before the Appellate Division
The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh has constitutional power under Article 105 to review its own judgments and orders.
The applicable procedure is contained in Order XXVI of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (Appellate Division) Rules, 1988.
Under Order XXVI Rule 1, review in a civil proceeding is based on grounds similar to those contained in Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC. In criminal proceedings, the rule identifies error apparent on the face of the record as the relevant ground.
Review Petition Before the High Court Division
Review proceedings concerning judgments of the High Court Division are governed by the applicable provisions of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (High Court Division) Rules, 1973, particularly Chapter X, which deals with applications for review of judgment.
The rules contain procedural requirements for filing a review application.
For example, the Supreme Court has emphasized the importance of complying with the requirement that a review application be accompanied by a certified copy of the judgment or order complained of.
Can a High Court Division Judgment Be Reviewed?
Yes, subject to the applicable law and procedural requirements.
The High Court Division Rules contain a specific chapter dealing with applications for review of judgment. The availability and scope of review depend on the nature of the judgment, the jurisdiction in which it was delivered and the applicable statutory and procedural provisions.
The limitation period can also vary according to the jurisdiction involved.
For example, the Supreme Court has recently referred to Article 162 of the First Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1908, which provides a 20-day limitation period for review of a judgment of the High Court Division in the exercise of its original jurisdiction.
Because limitation may depend on the specific proceeding and jurisdiction, the applicable provision should be checked before filing.
Can an Appellate Division Judgment Be Reviewed?
Yes.
Article 105 expressly gives the Appellate Division power to review its own judgment or order, subject to applicable legislation and the rules of the Division.
However, the threshold for review is narrow. A review petition cannot ordinarily be used to obtain a second appeal or a completely fresh hearing.
Can a Judgment Be Reviewed Because the Court Made a Wrong Decision?
Not necessarily.
A review does not exist simply because a party believes that the court reached an incorrect conclusion.
The applicant generally must identify a recognized review ground, such as:
newly discovered important evidence that satisfies the due-diligence requirement;
an error apparent on the face of the record; or
another legally sufficient ground recognized by the applicable law.
The Supreme Court has expressly cautioned against treating review as another opportunity to reargue a concluded case.
Can New Evidence Be Introduced in a Review Petition?
Potentially, but only within the legal requirements governing review.
The new evidence must generally be important and must not have been within the applicant's knowledge, or capable of being produced, despite due diligence at the relevant earlier stage.
Simply discovering evidence that could have been produced earlier does not ordinarily satisfy the statutory test.
Can a Review Petition Challenge Findings of Fact?
A review petition is not ordinarily intended to provide a fresh examination of factual findings.
If a party wants the court to reconsider witness credibility, reassess documentary evidence or choose between competing factual conclusions, that generally involves a broader reconsideration than ordinary review permits.
The Supreme Court has emphasized that review is not intended to reopen a concluded case for rehearing.
Procedure for Filing a Review Petition in Bangladesh
Although the exact procedure depends on the court and type of proceeding, the process generally involves the following stages.
Step 1: Obtain the Judgment or Order
The applicant should obtain the relevant judgment or order, including the required certified copy where the applicable rules require one.
For High Court Division review applications, the Supreme Court has specifically recognized the requirement concerning the certified copy of the judgment or order under Chapter X of the High Court Division Rules.
Step 2: Identify a Legally Recognized Ground
The applicant should determine whether the case involves:
new and important evidence;
an error apparent on the face of the record; or
another recognized sufficient reason.
The petition should clearly explain why the alleged error or new evidence satisfies the legal test.
Step 3: Check Limitation
The applicant should determine the applicable limitation period before filing.
Different proceedings may be governed by different limitation provisions. The Supreme Court has specifically noted the 20-day limitation applicable to review of a High Court Division judgment in the exercise of original jurisdiction under Article 162 of the First Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1908.
Step 4: Prepare the Review Application
The application generally identifies:
the parties;
the case number;
the judgment or order sought to be reviewed;
the relevant procedural history;
the specific grounds for review;
supporting documents; and
the relief requested.
The grounds should be precise rather than simply repeating arguments already rejected by the court.
Step 5: File the Application According to the Applicable Court Rules
The review application must comply with the relevant rules concerning:
form;
court fees;
supporting documents;
affidavits;
certified copies;
limitation; and
filing procedure.
The Supreme Court maintains separate rules concerning the High Court Division and Appellate Division.
Step 6: Preliminary Examination and Hearing
The court considers whether the review application discloses a legally recognizable basis for review.
Where appropriate, the parties may be heard before the court decides whether the judgment or order should be reviewed.
Step 7: Final Decision
The court may:
reject the review application;
discharge or dismiss the proceeding;
allow the review;
modify the earlier order; or
pass another order permitted by law.
The precise outcome depends on the applicable jurisdiction and the grounds established before the court.
What Happens If a Review Petition Is Dismissed?
If the court finds that the legal requirements for review have not been satisfied, the review petition may be dismissed.
A party cannot ordinarily continue filing review applications simply because the first review was unsuccessful. The rules and principles governing finality of litigation remain important.
Review Petition vs Revision Petition
Review and revision are often confused because both can involve correction of legal errors. However, they are fundamentally different remedies.
| Feature | Review | Revision |
|---|---|---|
| Basic concept | Reconsideration by the same court | Supervisory examination by a higher court |
| Main civil provisions | Section 114 & Order XLVII CPC | Section 115 CPC |
| Court | Generally the court that passed the decision | Superior court exercising revisional jurisdiction |
| Typical grounds | New evidence, apparent error, sufficient reason | Qualifying jurisdictional/legal errors |
| Purpose | Correct limited errors or consider qualifying new matters | Supervise subordinate courts within statutory limits |
| Appeal in disguise? | No | No |
Understanding this distinction is important when choosing the appropriate legal remedy.
Review Petition vs Writ Petition
A review petition and writ petition serve different purposes.
A review asks the court to reconsider its own judgment or order under the applicable review jurisdiction.
A writ petition under Article 102 of the Constitution invokes the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court Division in matters falling within Article 102.
Therefore, a party cannot automatically convert an unsuccessful case into a writ petition simply because review is unavailable or unsuccessful.
The appropriate remedy depends on the nature of the dispute and the applicable constitutional and statutory framework.
Common Mistakes in Review Petitions
Several mistakes can weaken a review application.
Treating Review as a Second Appeal
A review petition should not simply repeat the arguments made during the original hearing.
Failing to Identify the Exact Error
A vague allegation that “the judgment is wrong” is generally insufficient. The applicant should identify the specific error and explain why it falls within the recognized review grounds.
Introducing Evidence That Could Have Been Produced Earlier
The new-evidence ground is subject to the due-diligence requirement. Evidence that could reasonably have been produced earlier may not satisfy the test.
Ignoring Limitation
A review application filed outside the applicable limitation period may face a serious procedural obstacle.
Failing to Attach Required Documents
Where the applicable rules require a certified copy of the judgment or order, failure to comply can affect the validity of the application.
Attempting to Reargue the Entire Case
Courts have repeatedly emphasized that review is not intended to provide a defeated party with a second opportunity to argue the entire case.
Frequently Asked Questions About Review Petitions in Bangladesh
What is a review petition?
A review petition is an application asking a court to reconsider its own judgment or order on specific grounds recognized by law.
Which Article of the Constitution deals with review by the Appellate Division?
Article 105 of the Constitution of Bangladesh gives the Appellate Division power to review its judgments and orders, subject to applicable law and its rules.
Which CPC provision deals with review?
Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, together with Order XLVII, provides the principal statutory framework for civil review.
What are the main grounds for review?
The principal grounds include:
discovery of new and important matter or evidence that could not, despite due diligence, have been produced earlier;
mistake or error apparent on the face of the record; and
another sufficient reason recognized by law.
Is review the same as appeal?
No. An appeal generally provides a broader mechanism for challenging a decision before an appellate court. Review is a narrower remedy exercised by the court that made the decision.
Can a party file a review just because it disagrees with the judgment?
Generally, no. Mere dissatisfaction with the judgment is not by itself a sufficient basis for review.
Can new evidence justify a review?
It can, if the evidence is new and important and satisfies the applicable due-diligence requirements.
Can a review petition be filed against an Appellate Division judgment?
Yes. Article 105 expressly provides the Appellate Division with power to review its own judgments and orders.
Can a High Court Division judgment be reviewed?
Yes, subject to the applicable law, jurisdiction and the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (High Court Division) Rules, 1973. Chapter X specifically deals with applications for review of judgment.
How long do I have to file a review petition?
The applicable limitation period depends on the type of proceeding and jurisdiction. For example, the Supreme Court has identified a 20-day limitation period for review of a High Court Division judgment in the exercise of original jurisdiction under Article 162 of the First Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1908.
Does filing a review automatically suspend a judgment?
Not necessarily. The effect of filing a review and the availability of interim relief depend on the applicable law, rules and circumstances of the case.
Conclusion
A review petition in Bangladesh is a narrowly defined legal remedy intended to correct qualifying errors or address matters that could not properly have been considered when the original judgment was delivered. It is not designed to give a dissatisfied litigant a second appeal or an unrestricted opportunity to reargue the case.
For civil proceedings, Section 114 and Order XLVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provide the principal statutory framework. For the Appellate Division, Article 105 of the Constitution provides the constitutional foundation, with Order XXVI of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (Appellate Division) Rules, 1988 governing review procedure. The High Court Division has its own review procedure under Chapter X of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (High Court Division) Rules, 1973.
The central question in a review petition is therefore not simply “Was the judgment unfavorable?” but whether the case falls within a legally recognized ground for review, such as a qualifying newly discovered matter, an error apparent on the face of the record, or another sufficient reason recognized by law.
Authoritative Legal Sources
Constitution of Bangladesh — Article 105
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Bangladesh Laws
