Difference between Review, Revision and Appeal in Civil Cases

Before understanding the difference between review, revision and appeal under the Civil Procedure Code of 1908, let’s examine the Bare Act.

Review is a provision under Section 114, which states:

Subject as aforesaid, any person considering himself aggrieved-

• by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed by this Code, but from which no appeal has been preferred,
• by a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed by this Court, or
• by a decision on a reference from a Court of Small Causes, may apply for a review of judgment to the Court which passed the decree or made the order, and the Court may make such order thereon as it thinks fit.

The dictionary meaning of the word review is an act of carefully looking at or examining the quality or condition of something or someone: examination or inspection. As per Black’s Dictionary, a review is “to re-examine judicially. A reconsideration; second view or examination; revision; consideration for correction purposes.”

Review is to be filed by the aggrieved in the same court where the order or decree is passed. It is a discretionary right of the court and not a statutory right. According to section 114 of CPC, any person aggrieved by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed but not filed, or a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed, can file a review petition in the same court which passed such decree or order on the following grounds:

1. When new and important matter or evidence is discovered which after the exercise of due diligence was not within his knowledge, or could not be produced by him at the time when the decree or order was passed;
2. When there is any mistake or error apparent on the face of the record;
3. When there is any other sufficient reason.

There is no provision for reviewing an order already reviewed, unlike an appeal where there is a provision for a second appeal. Review is dealt with under Section 114 and Order 47 of the CPC.

Review by the Supreme Court:

Article 137 of the Constitution confers power on the Supreme Court to review its judgments subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament or the Rules made under clause (c) of Article 145. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s power cannot be curtailed by the Code of Civil Procedure.

Ram Singh and Others v Union of India Writ Petition 274 OF 2014, Civil Original Jurisdiction, Writ Petition No 274 OF 2014, Supreme Court of India judgement dated March 17, 2015

Lily Thomas vs Union Of India & Ors. on 5 April, 2000, Equivalent citations: 2000 (2) ALD Cri 686, 2000 (1) ALT Cri 363, 2001 (1) BLJR 499, 2000 CriLJ 2433, II (2000) DMC 1 SC, JT 2000 (5) SC 617, 2000 (4) SCALE 176, (2000) 6 SCC 224, 2000 (2) UJ 1113 SC

Revision:

Revision is defined under section 115 of CPC as

 [(1)] The High Court may call for the record of an case which has been decided by any Court subordinate to such High Court and in which no appeal lies thereto, and if such subordinate Court appears
(a) to have exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or
(b) to have failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or
(c) to have acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity, the High Court may make such order in the case as it thinks fit :
[Provided that the High Court shall no, under this section, vary or reverse any order made, or any order deciding an issue, in the course of a suit or other proceeding, except where
(a) the order, if it had been made in favour of the party applying for revision, would have finally disposed of the suit or other proceedings, or
(b) the order, if allowed to stand, would occasion a failure of justice or cause irreparable injury to the party against whom it was made.]
[(2) The High Court shall not, under this section, vary or reverse any decree or order against which an appeal lies either to the High Court or to any Court subordinate thereto.
Explanation. In this section, the expression “any case which has been decided” includes any order made, or any order deciding an issue in the course of a suit or other proceeding.]

The dictionary definition of revision is “a change or a set of changes that corrects or improves something”. Black’s Law dictionary defines it as “a re-examination or careful reading over for correction or improvement.”

Revision means re-examining cases involving the illegal assumption, non-exercise or irregular exercise of Jurisdiction. Revisional Jurisdiction does not confer any substantive right, and the right of Revision is merely a privilege granted to an aggrieved. In Revision, the court can interfere if the case brought before it is a decided case by a subordinate court and when the same is not appealable. If this condition is fulfilled, the revisional court may interfere to check where the subordinate court has:

1.  exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it, or
2. failed to exercise a jurisdiction vested in it, or (c) acted in exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.

The power of revision is exercised by the court superior to the court which decided the case; thus, only the High Court has this power, and no appeal lies from an order made in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction.

=====================================================================================

Gurudassing Nawoosing Panjwani v The State of Maharashtra and Others, Civil Appeal Jurisdiction, Civil Appeal No 5102 OF 2006, Supreme Court of India judgment dated November 6, 2015

=====================================================================================

Appeal

Under CPC, 1908, there is an entire part VII on appeals comprising sections 96 to 112; however, the expression appeal has yet to be defined in the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. The right to first appeal is substantive, but the second appeal is only allowed on substantial questions of law. Appeal means the removal of a cause from an inferior court to a superior one to test the soundness of the inferior court’s decision. The superior court need not be a High Court but may be a District Court.

The appeal is the continuation of the original proceedings before a superior court. The statutory right of appeal confers the right of re-hearing the whole dispute unless expressly restricted in scope, and the appellate court is not confined to the reasons the subordinate court has given for its decision. By section 96 of CPC, an appeal lies against all decrees passed by a court in the exercise of original civil jurisdiction, except consent decree, and decree passed in a suit filed under section (9) of the Specific Relief Act, and a final decree, the preliminary decree of which is not challenged. The appeal also lies against an order if provided for by section 104 or order 43 CPC. An appeal abates if the legal representatives of a deceased party are not brought on the record within the time allowed by law.

The Right to appeal arises when judgment is pronounced against the party. The Right to appeal doesn’t occur when the adverse decision is made, but on the day the suit is instituted, i.e., proceedings commence, the Right to appeal is conferred. Thus, it can be said the Right to appeal is an appeal substantive Right vested in parties from the date the suit was instituted.

Who can appeal?

1. Any party to the suit who is adversely affected by the decree or the transferee of interest of such party has been adversely affected by the decree provided his name was entered into the record of the suit.
2. An auction purchaser from an order in execution of a decree to set aside the same on the grounds of fraud.
3. Any person who is bound by the decree and decree would operate res judicata against him and is permitted by the Appellate Court to file an appeal.

Consent Decrees are not appealable. In Punjab National Bank vs Lakshmichand Rah, we were reported in AIR 2000 Madhya Pradesh; the High Court held that “It may incidentally be further seen that even the Code of Civil Procedure does not provide for an appeal under Section 96(3) against a consent decree. The Code of Civil Procedure also intends that finality is attached to it once the Civil Court passes a consent decree. Such finality cannot be permitted to be destroyed, particularly under the Legal Services Authorities Act, as it would amount to defeating the very aim and object of the Act with which it has been enacted. Hence, we hold that the appeal filed is not maintainable.”

====================================================================================

P.T. Thomas vs Thomas Job on 4 August, 2005, Supreme Court of India

====================================================================================

Following judgments can be used to differentiate between appeal and revision.

1. Lachhman Dass v. Santokh Singh, (1995), the Supreme Court held as under:
   …an appeal is a continuation of a suit or proceedings wherein the entire proceedings are again left open for consideration by the appellate authorities, which has the power to review the entire evidence subject, of course, to the prescribed statutory limitations. But in the case of revision, whatever powers the revisional authority may have, it has no power to reassess and reappreciate the evidence unless the statute expressly confers on it that power. That limitation is implicit in the concept of revision.”
2. State of Kerala K.M. Charia Abdullah & Co., (1965) the Supreme Court observed:
   When the legislature confers a right of appeal in one case and a discretionary remedy of revision in another, it must be deemed to have created two jurisdictions different in scope and content. When it introduced the familiar concepts of appeal and revision, it is reasonable to assume that the legislature accepted the well-known distinction between these two jurisdictions. There is an essential distinction between an appeal and a revision. The distinction is based on differences implicit in the said two expressions. An appeal is a continuation of the proceedings; in effect, all the proceedings are before the Appellate Authority, and it has the power to review the evidence subject to the statutory limitations prescribed. But in the case of a revision, whatever powers the revisional authority may or may not have, it does not have the power to review the evidence unless the statute expressly confers on it that power. That limitation is implicit in the concept of revision.”
3. Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. Keshvanand, (1998), the Supreme Court held:
   The learned Single Judge has equated appellate powers with revisional powers, and the core difference between an appeal and a revision needs to be addressed. It is a trite legal position that appellate jurisdiction is coextensive with the original court’s jurisdiction to appraise and appreciate evidence and reach findings on facts. An appellate court can reach its conclusion on evidence untrammelled by any finding entered by the trial court. On the other hand, Revisional powers belong to a superior court’s supervisory jurisdiction. While exercising revisional powers, the court has to confine to the legality and propriety of the findings and whether the subordinate court has kept itself within the bounds of its jurisdiction, including whether the court has failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it. Though the difference between the two jurisdictions is subtle, it is quite real and has now become well recognized in legal provinces.”