(A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.47 R.1–Reviews-Correction of Judgment-Error apparent on the face of record—Once an error is found in the order/judgment, which is apparent on the face of record and meets the test of review jurisdiction as laid down in Order XLVII Rule (1) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 read with Order XLVII Rule (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, there is no reason to feel hesitant in accepting such a mistake and rectify the same-ln fact, the reason for such a frank admission is to ensure that this mind of patent error from the record is removed which led to a wrong conclusion and consequently wrong is also remedied—For adopting such a course of action, the Court is guided by the doctrine of ex debito justitiae as well as the fundamental principal of the administration of justice that no one should suffer because of a mistake of the Court-Supreme Court Rules, 2013, O.41 R.1.

(B) Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.47 R.1-Review-Correction of Judgment-Error apparent on the face of record—When self-evident errors come to the notice of the Court and they are not rectified in exercise of review jurisdiction or jurisdiction of recall which is a facet of plenary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, a grave miscarriage of justice occurs.                                                            (Para 9)

Chairman & Managing Director Central Bank of India & Ors.

v.

Central Bank of India SC/ST Employees Welfare Association & Ors.

 2016(1) Law Herald (P&H) 230 (SC) : 2016 LawHerald.Org 532