Q. Define Revision. Distinguish between Review and Revision.

Ans. Meaning
Revision means to go through something carefully, thoroughly and diligently. Cases can be
revised by the High Court as it possesses revisional jurisdiction as defined under Section 115 of
the Code of Civil Procedure. The High Court has the right to revise cases decided by subordinate
courts to ensure delivery of justice and maintenance of fairness.

Nature, Scope and Object

The primary objective of a revisional authority of the High Court empowered by Section 115 is
to ensure that no subordinate court acts arbitrarily, illegally, capriciously, irregularly or exceeds
its jurisdiction; and allows the High Court to guarantee the delivery of justice while ensuring that
the proceedings are conducted in accordance with the rule of law and furtherance of fairness. It
must be noted that the judges of subordinate courts have the absolute authority to decide on
cases. They do not commit any “jurisdictional error” even when they wrongfully or extra-
judicially decide a case. The High Court has the power to revise these jurisdictional errors
committed by subordinate courts. This provides an opportunity to any aggrieved party to rectify
a non-appealable order by a subordinate court.

The High Court can revise any case by a subordinate court in which no appeal lies when:

1. The subordinate court has exercised jurisdiction not vested in it by law.

2. The subordinate court has failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it by law.
3. The subordinate court exercises its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity or in
breach of some provision of the law or by committing some errors of procedure in the
course of the trial which may have affected the ultimate decision.

Who may file?

The application for revision can be filed by any aggrieved party once the case is decided,
provided that there is no appeal against the case presently. The High Court may then decide to
revise the case if the proper cause is discovered such as extra-judicial activity or illegal and
erroneous procedure practised by the subordinate court. The High Court may also exercise
revisional jurisdiction suo moto under the Code of Civil Procedure.

In the case of S.Muthu Narayanan V. Paulraj Naicker, 2018, the revision petition is dismissed
and the order passed previously is confirmed as the revision petitioner has no right to challenge
the executability of the decree.

Conditions for Revision

Section 115 of the Code that vests revisionary powers on High Courts also provides for certain
conditions which are sine qua non to the exercise of revisionary jurisdiction by the High Court.
These conditions can be enlisted as follow:

1. Case must be decided: The case in which the application for revision is sought must
have been decided and should not be pending before the court for decision. As explained
before, in the case of Major S.S. Khanna the apex court observed that case must be
 decided does not only mean that the entire case must be disposed of and proceedings
must come to an end. The court held that when an order is made, that also amounts to
deciding of the case with respect one particular issue and revision can be sought against
such order as well.
2. No Appeal Allowed: Section 104 read with Order XLIII of the Code mentions orders
from which an appeal can be brought before a higher court. All other orders are non-
appealable. Similarly, a decree passed by court on the basis of the consent of both the
parties is non-appealable. These non-appealable orders or decrees can be revised by filing
an application before the High Court for revision and no other orders.
3. Jurisdictional Error: The lower court should have decided the case under one of the
three situations: (a) exercising jurisdiction which is not vested upon it, (b) not exercising
jurisdiction which is vested upon it and (c) illegally or arbitrarily exercising jurisdiction
vested upon it. All these circumstances are called jurisdictional errors. A revision is
allowed only if the lower court commits a jurisdictional error in any one of the three
ways.
4. Availability of Alternate Remedy: The power to exercise revisionary jurisdiction is a
discretionary power of the court and the litigant cannot claim it as a statutory right. Once
the application for revision in made, it is completely at the option of the court to exercise
its powers or not. In this regard, in the aforementioned case of Major Khanna it was
observed the Hon’ble apex court that when the High Court considers that an auxiliary and
potent remedy is available to the aggrieved person besides revision petition, the High
Courts may reject to entertain such application.

Section 115 of CPC and Article 227 of Constitution

Article 227 of the Indian Constitution entitles supervisory jurisdiction to all the High Courts to
peruse and superintend all lower courts within the territory of the High Court. It is often
misunderstood that Article 227 is a revisionary jurisdiction of the High Court granted by the
Constitution and people often get confused between Article 227 and Section 115.

Both these provisions are completely different from each other. The difference between these
provisions can be explained as follows:

 Section 115 grants revisionary powers which are merely judicial in nature and can be
exercised when a lower court commits a jurisdictional error. On the other hand, Article
227 bestows the power of superintendence which is judicial as well as administrative in
nature. It means High Court exercises supervision over the appointment, transfer and
dismissal of judges of lower courts as well under Article 227.
 Revisionary Jurisdiction is a statutory power and can be curtailed or modified by the
statute. However, supervisory power is a Constitutional power and cannot be curtailed by
law.
  Revisionary powers have limited application and are subject to the conditions mentioned
under Section 115 whereas the periphery of Article 227 is much broader and any case of
injustice by a lower court can be brought under this provision.

The limitation period for Revision

According to article 131 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for a revision of the decree or order, the
limitation period is 90 days. The revision application is required to be made before the High
Court within the limitation period.

Revision and Review

Sr.
Revision  Review
No.
The authority of revision can only be
A review can be done by any court that passes
(1) exercised by the High Court under which
the decree or order itself.
revisional jurisdiction lies.
Revisional power can only be exercised
Review of a decree or order can be done even if
(2) when no appeal lies against the order or
an appeal lies against the decree or order.
decree.
The revisional power of the High Court can An application must be filed by the aggrieved
(3) be exercised suo moto without any party for review in the court that passed the
application by an aggrieved party. order or decree.
The grounds are laid down under Rule 1 of
Jurisdictional error by a subordinate court is
(4) Order 47 of CPC, on which an application can
mainly the ground of revision.
be made for the review of a judgement.
The order passed to exercise revisional
The order granting a review can be appealed
(5) jurisdiction is non-appealable and cannot be
against in the court granting the review.
challenged.