Revision means “to look again”. Revision means the act of critical or careful examination or perusal with a view to correcting or improving. The object behind Section 115 is to prevent subordinate courts from acting arbitrarily and illegally in the exercise of their jurisdiction. There are certain things to be kept in mind:
1) A revision application under the code lies only to the High Court
2) A revision application lies from any decision of a court subordinate to the High Court from which no appeal lies to the High Court or to any subordinate court.
3) The revisional power of the High Court is purely discretionary. It is a discretionary remedy and cannot be claimed as a matter of right.
4) A revision application lies only on the ground of jurisdictional error.
5) Revisional jurisdiction involves only the question of law and this jurisdiction is never considered a rehearing.
Section 115 confers a power of revision on the High Court in a case not subject to appeal thereto. Section 115 applies to jurisdiction alone, the irregular exercise or non-exercise of it or the illegal assumption of it. But the mere fact that the decision of the lower court is erroneous, whether it is upon a question of fact or law, does not amount to illegality or material irregularity.
The High Court shall not, 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 has been made in favor of the party applying for revision, would have finally disposed of the suit or another proceeding, or
(b) The order, would occasion a failure of justice or cause irreparable injury to the other party if it is permitted to operate
The High Courtâ€™s revisional powers cannot be invoked unless the following conditions exist:
(1) There must be a case decided;
(2) The court deciding the case must be subordinate to the High Court;
(3) No appeal should lie to the High Court against the decision;
(4) In deciding the case the subordinate court must appear to have:
(a) Exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law; or
(b) Failed to exercise a jurisdiction vested in it by law; or
(c) Acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.
In the exercise of revisional powers it is not the duty of the High Court to enter into the merits of the evidence; it has only to see whether the requirements of the law have been duly and properly obeyed by the court whose order is the subject of the revision and whether the irregularity as to failure or exercise of jurisdiction is such as to justify interference with the order. The remedy by way of revision cannot be denied in a case where the order is not appealable and in which one or the other condition stated in Section 115 is satisfied.
ERROR OF LAW:
The section is not directed against the conclusion of law or fact in which the question of jurisdiction is not involved. Error of law is by itself no ground for revision unless it either results in a failure or wrong exercise of jurisdiction or amounts to a material irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction.
The power of the High Court under S. 115 is exercisable in respect of â€˜any case which has been decidedâ€™. A case can be said to have been decided when any rights or obligations for the parties sire adjudicated upon.
In accordance with the provisions of S. 115, C.P.C. it is necessary to establish three conditions precedent for calling upon and for requesting the revisional court to exercise the revisional jurisdiction. These conditions are as under:
(a) That the order impugned amounts to be a case decided;
(b) That the order impugned is not directly liable to be challenged by way of appeal from the order itself before the same court before which the revision has been filed;
(c) That the order impugned suffers from jurisdictional error, i.e.
(i) Either excess of jurisdiction, i.e., the exercise of jurisdiction by the court not vested;
(ii) Failure or illegal refusal to exercise the jurisdiction vested or the court below is alleged and proved to have acted illegally or with material irregularity in exercise of its jurisdiction in passing the order impugned.
Illegal or irregular order of lower court bringing out just result:
The High Court is not bound to interfere under S. 115, C.P.C. except in aid of justice. Thus was the order of a subordinate court has brought about a just result and where the setting aside of the order would bring about an unjust result, the High Court would not exercise its discretion under S. 115, C.P.C., and interfere with such order, even though the order suffers from illegality or irregularity.
If the court below has exercised its jurisdiction in a prescribed way but its decision is based upon erroneous conclusions of facts or law, it cannot be said to have acted illegally or with material irregularity in the exercise of its jurisdiction.
An appeal can be converted into an application for revision under Section 115, C.P.C.