Kerala High Court: Article 227 Cannot Be Used as an Appellate or Revisional Power
Last Updated on February 10, 2025 by Athi Venkatesh
The Kerala High Court ruled that its supervisory power under Article 227 of the Constitution must be used sparingly. The Court stated that this power does not serve as an appellate or revisional authority. It applies only in cases of grave injustice or flagrant legal violations.
The case arose from a specific performance suit. The plaintiffs sought the execution of a sale deed. The Trial Court referred the matter to Lok Adalat, where the parties reached a settlement. The settlement allowed the plaintiffs to deposit the sale consideration in case the defendants defaulted.
Later, the plaintiffs applied to the Trial Court to deposit the balance amount as the defendants failed to comply. The Trial Court allowed this request. The defendants then moved the High Court, challenging the order.Justice K. Babu examined the case in detail. The Court noted that the defendants had to submit property documents within three weeks. However, they failed to provide evidence of compliance. The Court cited Section 114(g) of the Indian Evidence Act.
It inferred that withholding evidence implies it would not favor the party withholding it. Since the defendants did not fulfill their obligation, the plaintiffs were justified in depositing the balance sale consideration later.
The Court reaffirmed that Article 227 does not allow appellate or revisional jurisdiction. It intervenes only in cases of manifest legal errors or gross injustice. Finding no such grounds, the Court dismissed the petition.
