Skip to content Skip to left sidebar Skip to right sidebar Skip to footer
Choose language:

Tag: define Review

Review and Appeal under C.P.C

Review

Definition:
A review is a judicial re-examination of the same case by the same court to correct an apparent error. It allows for rectification of a mistake without going to a higher court.

Legal Provisions:

  • Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908: Section 114 and Order 47
  • Indian Limitation Act, 1963: Article 124 (provides a 30-day limitation period for filing a review petition from the date of the decree or order).

Examples:

  1. Aribam Tuleshwar Sharma v. Aribam Pishak Sharma (1979) – The Supreme Court highlighted that a review is permissible only when there is an error apparent on the face of the record and not for re-arguing the matter.

Case Laws:

  1. Kamlesh Verma v. Mayawati & Ors. (2013) – The Supreme Court clarified that review jurisdiction is not to be confused with an appellate jurisdiction and is to be exercised only for correction of a patent error.

Appeal

Definition:
An appeal is a legal process by which a higher court re-examines the decision of a lower court. It involves a re-assessment of the facts and law involved in the case.

Legal Provisions:

  • Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908: Sections 96-112 (deal with first appeals and second appeals)
  • Indian Limitation Act, 1963: Articles 114-117 (provide limitation periods for filing appeals)

Examples:

  1. First Appeal: If a party is aggrieved by a decree passed by a district court, they can file a first appeal in the High Court.
  2. Second Appeal: If a party is aggrieved by the decision in the first appeal, they can file a second appeal in the Supreme Court or High Court on substantial questions of law.

Case Laws:

  1. N. Suriyakala v. A. Mohandoss (2007) – The Supreme Court discussed the scope of second appeals and emphasized that they are maintainable only on substantial questions of law.
  2. Kondiba Dagadu Kadam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar (1999) – It was held that re-appreciation of evidence is not permissible in second appeals.

Relevant Sections from the Indian Limitation Act, 1963

  • Article 124: Provides for a 30-day period for filing a review petition.
  • Article 114: Provides for a 90-day period for filing an appeal to the High Court from an original decree.
  • Article 115: Provides for a 30-day period for filing an appeal from an order of a High Court to the same court.
  • Article 116: Provides for a 90-day period for filing an appeal to the Supreme Court from a High Court decree or order.
  • Article 117: Provides for a 60-day period for filing an appeal to any other court from a decree or order.

Relevant Sections from the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

  • Sections 96-112: Cover the provisions related to appeals.
  • Section 96: First appeal from decrees.
  • Section 100: Second appeal.
  • Section 108: Power of the appellate court.
  • Section 114 and Order 47: Deal with review.
  • Order 47, Rule 1: Grounds for review.
  • Order 47, Rule 5: Application for review in Court of Small Causes.

Limitations of Review and Appeal

  • Review:
  • Restricted to correction of an apparent error.
  • Cannot be used for re-arguing the case.
  • Limited time period for filing (30 days).
  • Appeal:
  • First appeals allow re-assessment of facts and law, but second appeals are limited to substantial questions of law.
  • Longer and more complex process compared to reviews.
  • Time-bound as per the Limitation Act.

Understanding the mechanisms and constraints of review and appeal processes helps ensure proper legal recourse and the rectification of judicial errors within the framework of the law.

comparison between review and appeal:

AspectReviewAppeal
DefinitionRe-examination by the same court to correct an error.Re-examination by a higher court of the decision of a lower court.
Legal ProvisionsCPC: Section 114 and Order 47, Limitation Act: Article 124CPC: Sections 96-112, Limitation Act: Articles 114-117
ScopeLimited to correcting apparent errors.Involves re-assessment of facts and law.
GroundsError apparent on the face of the record.Errors in application of law, procedural errors, or incorrect findings.
Time Limit30 days from the date of the decree or order.Varies: 30-90 days depending on the type of appeal and court.
JurisdictionSame court that passed the original order.Higher court (appellate court).
ExamplesAribam Tuleshwar Sharma v. Aribam Pishak Sharma (1979)First Appeal: District court to High Court; Second Appeal: High Court to Supreme Court
Case LawsKamlesh Verma v. Mayawati & Ors. (2013)N. Suriyakala v. A. Mohandoss (2007), Kondiba Dagadu Kadam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar (1999)
OutcomeCorrection of mistakes without re-hearing the entire case.Re-examination and potential re-hearing of the case.
Nature of ProcessSummary process focused on error correction.Detailed process involving re-evaluation of legal and factual issues.
Evidence Re-assessmentGenerally not allowed.Allowed, especially in the first appeal.
ComplexitySimpler and quicker.More complex and time-consuming.
Substantial QuestionsNot applicable.Second appeals require substantial questions of law.

Conclusion

In summary, while both review and appeal serve as mechanisms for judicial re-examination, they cater to different aspects of judicial oversight. A review focuses on correcting apparent errors within the same court, offering a quicker and simpler means of rectification. In contrast, an appeal involves a higher court reassessing both legal and factual elements of a case, providing a more comprehensive re-evaluation but with greater complexity and time requirements. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for effectively navigating legal recourse and ensuring just outcomes in the judicial system.

Differences Between Review and Revision

Revision

Definition:
Revision under the CPC refers to the process by which a higher court (usually a High Court) exercises its supervisory jurisdiction over the orders of subordinate courts. The purpose of revision is to correct jurisdictional errors, irregularities, or illegality in the exercise of jurisdiction by the subordinate courts.

Applicability:

  • Section 115 CPC: Section 115 of the CPC provides for the power of the High Court to call for the record of any case which has been decided by any court subordinate to it.

Purpose:

  • The purpose of revision is to ensure that subordinate courts have not acted beyond their jurisdiction or have not committed any material irregularity in the exercise of their jurisdiction.

Grounds for Revision:

  • A jurisdictional error or irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction by a subordinate court.
  • Any illegality or material irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction.

Scope:

  • Revision allows for a broader scrutiny compared to review. It can examine both questions of law and fact, ensuring that lower courts have not acted beyond their jurisdiction.

Authority:

  • Revision petitions are typically decided by a higher court (e.g., High Court) that has supervisory jurisdiction over the subordinate court.

Time Limit:

  • There is no strict time limit prescribed for filing a revision petition, but it should be filed promptly.

Orders Relevant to Revision:

  • Order XLVII CPC (Order 47): Provides for the procedure for filing an application for review.

Review

Definition:
Review under the CPC refers to the process of re-examining an order or judgment of a court for the purpose of correcting an error apparent on the face of the record, which is not correctable by any other means.

Applicability:

  • Section 114 CPC: Section 114 of the CPC provides for the power of the court to review its own judgment or order.
  • Order XLVII CPC (Order 47): Governs the procedure for filing a review petition.

Purpose:

  • To correct errors of law or fact that are apparent on the face of the record.
  • To address new and important matters or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence, was not within the knowledge of the party seeking review.

Grounds for Review:

  • Discovery of new and important matter or evidence.
  • Mistake or error apparent on the face of the record.
  • Any other sufficient reason.

Scope:

  • The scope of review is limited to correcting errors that are apparent on the face of the record. It does not include re-evaluation of evidence or re-hearing of the case.

Authority:

  • Generally decided by the same court that passed the original order or judgment.

Time Limit:

  • A review petition must typically be filed within 30 days from the date of the judgment or order sought to be reviewed.

Orders Relevant to Review:

  • Order XLVII CPC (Order 47): Provides for the procedure for filing an application for review.

Comparison in Table Format:

AspectRevisionReview
DefinitionThe higher court’s exercise of supervisory jurisdiction over the orders of subordinate courts.The re-examination of an order or judgment of a court to correct an error apparent on the face of the record.
ApplicabilitySection 115 CPCSection 114 CPC
PurposeCorrecting jurisdictional errors or irregularities in subordinate court decisions.Correcting errors of law or fact apparent on the face of the record.
GroundsJurisdictional error, irregularity, or illegality.Discovery of new and important matter or evidence, mistake or error apparent on the face of the record.
ScopeBroad scrutiny of both law and facts.Limited to errors apparent on the face of the record.
AuthorityHigh Court or equivalent higher court.Same court that passed the original order or judgment.
Time LimitNo strict time limit, but should be filed promptly.Typically within 30 days from the date of the judgment or order.

Conclusion

In summary, Revision and Review under the CPC serve different purposes and are governed by different provisions. Revision allows a higher court to correct jurisdictional errors or irregularities in subordinate court decisions, while Review allows a court to correct errors apparent on the face of the record of its own decision. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for parties seeking to challenge judicial orders or judgments under the CPC, ensuring they choose the appropriate legal recourse based on the circumstances of their case.