Up until the execution of the degree and order, the Civil Procedure Code governs all proceedings in civil courts and the parties before them. Continue reading to know more about the process of reference, revision and review under the civil code.
Navigating Legal Recourse: Reference, Review, and Revision under CPC
In the realm of Indian law, the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908, provides avenues for legal recourse when parties are dissatisfied with a court’s judgment. While filing an appeal is the conventional route, the CPC introduces alternative mechanisms such as Reference, Review, and Revision to address procedural or technical issues without resorting to a full-fledged appeal.
Understanding Reference under CPC
Section 113 of the CPC governs references, a process where a lower court may seek guidance from the High Court on a legal question to avoid any misunderstanding of the law. Notably, this is initiated by the lower court itself, addressing uncertainties about the validity of legal provisions.
Circumstances for a reference include issues related to the legality of acts, rules, regulations, or determining the constitutionality of legal requirements. The lower court exercises this right during the ongoing proceedings when clarity on a legal matter is deemed necessary.
Delving into Review under CPC
Section 114 of the CPC deals with reviews, allowing an aggrieved party to submit an application for the review of a court’s decision in the same court where the decree was issued. This provision grants the court the authority to rectify its decision due to errors or mistakes, including the filing of a Caveat Petition.
Situations permitting a review include scenarios where an appeal is allowable but not filed, certain decrees/orders with no appeal provision, or rulings from Small Causes Courts. Grounds for review involve the discovery of new information, apparent inaccuracies on the face of the record, or other valid grounds recognized by the CPC.
| The application for review must be submitted within 30 days of the order/decree, and the decision resulting from the review is final and binding. However, the court holds the discretion to accept or reject a review petition. |
Examining Revision under CPC
Section 115 of the CPC confers Revisional Jurisdiction upon the High Court, allowing it to reopen cases decided by lower courts without proper jurisdiction. Moreover, revisional jurisdiction is a privilege, not a substantive right.
Parties can seek revision under conditions like wrongful assumption of jurisdiction, non-performance of jurisdiction, or irregularities in exercising jurisdiction by the lower court. Revisional decisions by the High Court are not subject to appeal, as this authority is exclusive.
Power of Review: Unveiling Section 114 of CPC
Section 114 of the CPC empowers courts to conduct a review, implying a reevaluation of the case’s facts and judgement. This substantial power is granted to the court, and while the section doesn’t prescribe specific conditions, Order 47 of the CPC details the review process’s limitations and conditions. It outlines nine rules, establishing the framework for review.
Review, as an act of reexamination or reconsideration, is an integral part of the legal process. It provides a mechanism for the court to rectify errors, ensuring justice prevails. The inherent power to review rests exclusively with the court, emphasizing the importance of a fair and just legal system.
Time Limit for Filing a Judgment Review Application: Review under CPC
In accordance with the Supreme Court Rules of 1966, the application for review must be submitted within 30 days from the date of the judgment or order. In the case of an appeal against a sentence or judgment in a High Court, the filing period is extended to 60 days from the judgment date. However, when appealing against a death sentence or capital punishment, the limitation period is further reduced to 30 days from the issuance of the order.
-
Rule 5 of Order 47 of CPC
Rule 5 of Order 47 in the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) pertains to the application for review of order under cpc in a court consisting of two or more judges. If the judge or judges involved in the original decision are still attached to the court and available for a period of six months after the review application is presented, they are mandated to her the application. No other judges from the court are permitted to handle the review during this period.
The principle behind this rule is that the same judge who made the original judgment is deemed ideal for reviewing it, though any court of competent jurisdiction can step in if the original judge is unavailable for six months or more.
-
Rule 6 of Order 47 of IPC
Rule 6 of Order 47 outlines the procedure when a review application under cpc is heard by more than one judge. If the court is equally divided, the application is rejected. If there is a majority, the decision aligns with the majority opinion.
Review applications can be rejected on several grounds, including if the application is not based on the discovery of new facts, an apparent error on the face of the record, or any other substantial and analogous grounds specified in the rules. Rejections can also occur if the review is filed after the prescribed time period without reasonable excuse, if the appeal pertains to an already reviewed order, or if the applicant fails to appear on the scheduled date without sufficient reason.
-
Rule 7 of Order 47 of IPC:
Rule 7 of Order 47 establishes that the rejection of a Review petition under CPC is not appealable. However, an order granting an application may be objected to through an appeal from the order or in an appeal from the final decree or order in the suit. If the application is rejected due to the applicant’s failure to appear, they can apply to have it restored to the file, provided they can prove sufficient cause for non-appearance.
-
Rule 8 of Order 47 of CPC:
Rule 8 of Order 47 stipulates that when a review application is granted, the court notes it in the register and may proceed to rehear the case or make any other order it deems appropriate.
-
Rule 9 of Order 47 of CPC:
Finally, Rule 9 of Order 47 states that no application to review an order made on a review application or a decree/order passed or made on a review shall be entertained, indicating that there will be no further review of any decision resulting from a review order.
Summing Up
|
The Takeaway
With a commitment to providing comprehensive insights into legal matters, Vakilsearch plays a pivotal role in aiding individuals and businesses in understanding and applying the provisions outlined in the CPC.
Whether it’s legal guidance, support with documentation, or assistance in legal processes, Vakilsearch serves as a reliable partner in ensuring that individuals and organizations can navigate the complexities of the legal landscape with confidence and clarity.
To know more, request a callback from our experts right away!
Read More:
