Review Petition Cannot Be Filed For Objecting Jurisdiction Of Court After It Passed Order On Merit: Karnataka HC
The Karnataka High Court dismissed a Review Petition while imposing costs of Rs. 25k.

The Karnataka High Court has held that a Review Petition cannot be filed for objecting jurisdiction of a Court after it passed an Order on merit.
The Court dismissed a Review Petition filed under Order 47 Rule 1 of the CPC by M/s Renram Fashions India Pvt. Ltd. (Petitioner) challenging the Court’s earlier decision which set aside the Order of the Employees State Insurance (ESI) Court. The ESI Court had reduced the damages for delay in payment of contribution imposed by the Employees State Insurance Corporation (Respondent) under Section 85-B of the Employees State Insurance Corporation Act (the Act).
A Single Bench of Justice HP Sandesh held, “It is important to note that having taken note of Section 21 of CPC, it is very clear that if there is any objection with regard to the jurisdiction, same has to be raised at the earliest possible opportunity but the same has not been done and now, after passing the order, when the said order goes against him, the present review petition is filed on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction.”
Advocate Joseph Kanikaraj represented the Petitioner, while Advocate C Shashikantha appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts
The Petitioner filed a Review Petition contending that the Appeal should have been heard by a Division Bench as per Section 5(i) of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 (1961 Act) based on pecuniary jurisdiction.
Court’s Reasoning
The High Court noted that the petition was filed only on the ground that Section 5(i) of the 1961 Act says that in all the first appeals against a decree or order passed in a suit or other proceedings, the value of the subject matter of which exceeds Rs.15,00,000/- have to be heard by a Bench consisting of not less than Two Judges of the High Court and other first appeals have to be heard by a Single Judge of the High Court.
“It is important to note that the counsel for the respondent also relied upon Section 21 of CPC in respect of jurisdiction is concerned. Having read the proviso of Section 21 referred above, it is very clear that no objection as to the place of suing shall be allowed by any Appellate or Revisional Court unless such objection was taken in the Court of first instance at the earliest possible opportunity and in all cases where issues are settled at or before such settlement, and unless there has been a consequent failure of justice,” the Court explained.
The Bench stated that the Review Petitioner came up for the Review of the order of the unsuccessful Appeal only on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction. “Hence, the Court has to take note of the conduct of the review petitioner in filing this review petition,” it remarked.
Consequently, the Court held, “The review petition is dismissed with cost of Rs.25,000/- payable within four weeks from today. If cost not paid in time, registry is directed to recover the same in accordance with law.”
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Review Petition.
Cause Title: M/S Renram Fashions India Pvt Ltd. v. The ESI Corporation (Neutral Citation: 2025:KHC:2767)
Click here to read/download the Order