In the Indian Civil litigation, the concept of revision under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) plays a pivotal role in ensuring that the subordinate courts exercise their jurisdiction properly and within legal limits. This revisional power is vested in the High Courts under Section 115 of the CPC, allowing them to supervise and correct jurisdictional errors made by subordinate courts. But unlike appeals, revision is not a rehearing on facts; it is strictly limited in scope. It may be noted here that in certain states, the District Court is also empowered to entertain revision petitions, which is done to reduce the work load of the High Courts e.g. State of Odisha
(toc)
What Is Revision under CPC?
The power of Revision is described in Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (in short CPC). The Section 115 of the CPC empowers the High Court to call for the record of any case decided by a subordinate court where:
- No appeal lies to the High Court, and
- The subordinate court has:Exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or Failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or Acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.
This power is discretionary and supervisory, not appellate. The objective is not to substitute the decision of the lower court, but to correct jurisdictional errors.To maintain brevity, the Section 115 is quoted here below:
“115. Revision.—(1) The High Court, in cases arising out of original suits or other proceedings of the value exceeding five lakhs rupees and the District Court, in any other cases, including a case arising out of an original suit or other proceedings instituted before the commencement of the Code of Civil Procedure ( Orissa Amendment) Act, 2010, may call for the record of any case which has been decided by any Court subordinate to the High Court or the District Court, as the case may be, 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 or the District Court, as the case may be, may make such order in the case as it thinks fit: Provided that in respect of cases arising out of original suits or other proceedings of any valuation decided by the District Court, the High Court alone shall be competent to make an order under this section. (2) The High Court or the District Court, as the case may be, shall not under this section, vary or reverse any order, including an order deciding an issue, made in the course of a suit or other proceedings, except where the order, if it had been made in favor of the party applying for revision, would have finally disposed of the suit or other proceedings. (3) A revision shall not operate as a stay of suit or other proceeding before the Court except where such suit or other proceeding is stayed by the High Court or District Court, as the case may be. Explanation—In this section, the expression “any case which has been decided” includes any order deciding an issue in the course of a suit or other proceeding.”
Odisha Amendment to Section 115:
By virtue of Orissa Gazette Ext. No. 1785 dt. 02.11.2010 (w.e.f. 11.11.2010) Notification no. 11730, Legis Dated 02.11.2010, there has been an Local Amendment to the provisions contained in Section 115 of the CPC, wherein the District Courts were also empowered to entertain the revision petitions in certain cases along with the High Courts. However, the revisional jurisdictions of both District Court and the High COurt are not concurrent. It is specifically mentioned in the State Amendment that where the value of the suit, out of which the case of revision arises, is more than 5 (five) lakhs, the Revision Petition is to be filed before the High Court and where the valuation is less such threshold of Rs. 5 (five) lakhs, the Revision is to be filed before the District Court.
It is pertinent to note here that if an Order is passed by the Trial Court, which may be the Civil Judge (Seniro or Junior division) which is revisable, then the District Courts may entertain such revision cases. However, if the suit itself is filed before the District Court or before the ADJ, as the case may be, then revision petition would lie before the High Court irrespective of the valuation of the suit.
Uttar Pradesh Amendment to Section 115:
In the amendment to Section 115 of the CPC in Uttar Pradesh, if the valuation of the suit is Rs. 20,000/- (twenty thousand) or above, then revision lies before the High Court, or else if it is below the threshold amount aforesaid, then District Courts are competent to entertain the revision petitions.
Essential Ingredients of a Revision Petition:
In order to a revision petition to be maintainable, certain essential ingredients must be satisfied:
- No Appeal Lies: The decision challenged must not be appealable.
- Revision is maintainable only where no regular appeal is available. [ex. Section 96, Section 100, Order 41, Order 42 or Order 43 etc]
- Subordinate Court’s Order: The revision lies before a Court only against an order passed by a subordinate court to it.
- Jurisdictional Error: There must be a jurisdictional defect—either the court exercised jurisdiction it did not have, failed to exercise jurisdiction it did have, or exercised it illegally or with material irregularity.
- Case Decided: The order must amount to a “case decided.” It doesn't have to be a final judgment, but should decide a substantial right of the parties. In other words, if the application of the revisioner-petitioner would have been allowed, then it would have amounted to finality of the suit i.e. the suit would have been disposed of.
When Is Revision Maintainable?
- Revision is maintainable in the following scenarios:
- When the lower court passes an interlocutory order that affects the rights of the party and no appeal lies.
- When the trial court exercises jurisdiction erroneously—for example, rejecting a plaint on technical grounds without examining the merits.
- When a court passes an order without proper application of mind or misinterprets statutory provisions.
- When an order causes injustice due to procedural irregularity, like denying the right to file written statements or evidence.
When Is Revision Not Maintainable?
Revision will not lie if:
- An appeal lies against the order.
- The order does not result in any injustice or does not materially affect the rights of the parties.
- The error is merely procedural and does not involve a jurisdictional issue.
Illustrations:
- For an instance, if a suit has been filed by the plaintiff seeking declaration of right, title and interest and the defendants have filed and application U/O 7 Rule 11 of CPC for rejection of the plaint. The application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code was rejected. Then the defendants can seek for revision petition before the Higher Court.
- If the application U/O 7 Rule 11 of CPC for rejection of the plaint filed by the defendants has been allowed and the plaint is rejected, resultantly the suit is dismissed/disposed of, then no Revision petition can be preferred and the only remedy for the plaintiffs would be appeal under Section 96 read with Order 41 Rule 1 of the CPC.
- If the plaint is rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 and the plaintiffs have filed the appeal, where the appeal is allowed and the Order rejecting the plaint is set aside, in that event the suit is restored. Hence the defendants can file revision petition before High Court.
- In the event the Application for rejection of the Plaint U/O 7 Rule 11 of CPC is rejected by the Trial Court and Revision is preferred by the defendants, and if the revision is allowed by rejecting the plaint, in that case, the Order of Revision is not appellable and the only remedy available to the plaintiffs to challenge the same is under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court.
Case Laws:
In Shiv Shakti Coop. Housing Society, Nagpur Vs. Swaraj Developers and Ors reported in (2003)6SCC 659 it was categorically held that:
“A plain reading of Section 115 as it stands makes it clear that the stress is on the question whether the order in favour of the party applying for revision would have given finality to suit or other proceeding. If the answer is 'yes', then the revision is maintainable. On the contrary, if the answer is 'no' then the revision is not maintainable. Therefore, if the impugned order is of interim in nature or does not finally decide the lis, the revision will not be maintainable. The legislative intent is crystal clear. Those orders, which are interim in nature, cannot be the subject matter of revision under Section 115.”
Conclusion
The power of revision under Section 115 CPC is a check-and-balance mechanism that prevents judicial overreach and ensures that subordinate courts act within the bounds of their authority. However, being a discretionary remedy, it must be used sparingly and only when necessary to prevent a miscarriage of justice. More importantly, only those Orders which would have given finality to the suit or case are only amenable to the revision jurisdiction, and no other orders are.