UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES,

PANJAB UNIVERSITY, CHANDIGARH

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

j

REFERENCE, REVIEW AND

REVISION WITH DIFFERENCES

SUBMITTED TO: DR.KARAN JAWANDA

SUBMITTED BY:YUVRAJ RAHUL SINGH

B.COM .LL.B [HONS] 8TH SEM

161/18 SECTION: C

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I take the opportunity to express our profound gratitude and warm regards to my
teacher Ms.Karan Jawanda for her exemplary guidance, support, monitoring
and constant encouragement in this research endeavor. I offer a humble and
sincere appreciation for the learning opportunities provided to me through the
medium of this project.
As a consequence of the above, I have learned a lot about the tools and
techniques of research methodology, how to go about successfully completing a
research study, and most importantly I have been enlightened about the concept
of “REFERENCE ,REVIEW AND REVISION ”.
Completion of this project on the topic “REFERENCE , REVIEW AND
REVISION” has been a rather intellectually stimulating and enriching
experience.

2
 INDEX

S.NO. TOPIC PG.NO.

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. REFERENCE 2

3. REVIEW 8

4. REVISION 12

5. DIFFERENCES 14

6. CONCLUSION 18

7. REFERENCES 19

3
 Introduction:
In order to understand concepts such as Reference, review and revision, as per
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), a party, who is offended by the decision
of the court, can reach out to higher court by way of appeal against the decision
given by the trial court/lower court. In case of appeal, the entire judgement is
scrutinized and heard again by the higher authority. However, in the case, where
there is a prima facie error on technical or procedural ground, the parties are not
required to file a fresh case and appeal. In such cases, CPC has the provision of
reference review and revision under section 113, 114 and 115 of CPC
respectively.

Synopsis
Every human being commits a mistake and judges are also human beings. So,
the provisions of reference, review and revision are given under the Civil
Procedure Code in order to maintain the fairness and accuracy of the justice
system.

Reference
Section 113 of Civil Procedure Code deals with the provision of reference.
Under the provision of Section 113, a lower or subordinate court can reach out
to higher court for the doubt in order to avoid the misinterpretation of the law
which is called reference. Parties through an application can move the reference
to the High court. Lower Court can apply the provision of reference suo-moto in
case of any doubt with respect to any legal provision. The lower court is not
bound to refer to the High Court other than in case of validity of legal provision.
It helps the lower court to avoid commission of error while pronouncing the

4
judgement. The subordinate court can use its right to reference in the following
situation:

1. In case of any question arising in the court at the time of entertaining

the suit with respect to the validity of any act, rules, order, ordinance
etc.

5
 2. Where the court has the opinion or feels that any provision of the law
is invalid or not in the power of court (“ultra-virus”).
3. The High Court or Supreme Court must have not made such question
on the provision of law invalid.
4. The court feels that it is important to take the reference of high court
for ascertaining the validity of the provisions mentioned in the law
before disposal of any case.

There can be two types of doubts which need to be referred under this section.

1. In case, the doubt has arisen with respect to any Act or law, it is
mandatory for the lower court to take the reference or opinion from the
High court.
2. However, in case the doubt has come up during proceedings, it is not
mandatory for the lower court to take the opinion of the High Court.
The lower court can suo-moto refer to the High Court.

Object:
The object behind the provisions of Reference is to empower the subordinate
court to obtain the opinion of the High Court in non-appealable cases when
there is a question of law so that any commission of error could be avoided
which couldn’t be remedied later on.

As held in the case of Diwali Bai v. Sadashivdas, the reference must be made
before passing of the judgement of the case.

Conditions for seeking reference:

Order 46 of CPC mentions the procedure of making a reference. In order to

make a reference to High Court, subordinate court needs to satisfy the condition
mentioned in Order 46 of Civil Procedure Code which has been produced as
follows:

6
 1. The suit or appeal must be pending before the court while making a
reference and no further appeal from the order of such suit or decree is
lying before the court.
2. The question of the validity of provision of law must have arisen
during the pendency of the suit i.e. during proceeding of the suit in the
court.
3. When such doubt regarding the validity of the provision of law has
arisen, the court must have been entertaining the suit.

While making the reference, the district court can put the case on stay, or it can
pass a contingent order. The subordinate court, after taking into account the
opinion of the high court where such reference has been made, may pass order
or decree.

There are two classes of the question of law on which the subordinate court may
entertain the doubt

1. Questions related to the validity of any Act, Ordinance or Regulations.

2. Any other questions.

Under the second condition, reference is optional but in the first condition that is
a question related to any Act, Ordinance or Regulations, reference is obligatory.

Reference is obligatory in such condition when the following conditions are

fulfilled:

1. In order to dispose of the case, the decision of such question is

necessary.
2. The subordinate court seeking reference is of the view that the Act,
Ordinance or regulation is ultra vires.
3. There is no determination that such Act is ultra vires either by the
Supreme Court or the High Court to which the court is subordinate to.

A reference can be made by the judge only in the case when the judge who is
dealing with that case has a reasonable doubt about it. When any matter is

7
already decided by the High Court to which the court seeking reference is
subordinate to then it is not considered as a reasonable question of doubt.

Who can apply for reference?

The court of civil judicature can refer the case to the High Court either on an
application made by a party or suo moto. As held in the case
ofRamakantBindal v. State of U.P, no reference can be made by a tribunal.

Powers and duty of the referring court:

A reference can be made in a suit, appeal or execution proceeding pending
before the court only when there is a doubt of law. As held in the case
ofBanarasi Yadav v. Krishna Chandrait was held that the question of law
about which the subordinate court is doubtful, must have actually been called
upon in the case for adjudication and it shouldn’t be a hypothetical question.

Therefore, no reference can be made on a hypothetical question or a point that

may or may not arise in future. But, if the situation arises it may be considered
for reference.

Power and duty of the High Court:

The High has consultative jurisdiction in this context. When reference is sought
from the High Court and while dealing it the High Court is not bound to decide
only the question of law in doubt. As held in the case of S.K. Roy v. Board of
Revenue, the High Court can consider the new aspects of law also if any new
aspect arises.

To answer the question for which reference is sought totally upon the discretion
of the High Court as discussed underOrder 46of the Code. The High Court may
answer the question and send the case back to the referring court to dispose of it
in accordance with the law. It is also upon the discretion of the High Court to
refuse to answer the question and it has even power to quash it.

Effects of Reference:
In the case ofL.S Sherlekar v. D.L. Agarwal, it was held that when the
reference is sought from the High Court and the decree is confirmed if the High
Court answers the question in favour of the plaintiff. If the answer of the High
Court is against him, the suit is dismissed.

8
Rule 3 of Order 46states the provision that after hearing the parties if the High
Court desires, it shall decide the referred points and transmits a copy of its
judgement to the subordinate court which shall dispose of the case in reference
to said decisions.

Review
Section 114 of Civil Procedure Code defines the provision of review. In case of
review, the party who is not happy or aggrieved with the order of the court can
file an application for review in the same court which has passed the decree.
This provision has been made so as to facilitate the court to review their own
decree or judgement and rectify the same in case any error has been made while
passing the judgement.

It was held in case of Ram Baksh v. Rajeshwari Kunwar, AIR 1948 AII 213that
the option of review is still there even if the appeal has been dismissed on any
ground.

Order 47 of the CPC defines the procedure to be followed in case of review. In

the following situation, the application for review can be filed by the parties:

1. The decree or judgement is appealable however, no appeal has been

preferred under the law.
2. In case of no provision for appeal has been mentioned in the law for
certain decree or judgement.
3. The Court of Small Causes has passed the decision.

The law defines certain grounds on which application for review can be filed:
1. Where there are new discoveries of the facts, which were not in
knowledge or could not produce at the time of passing of decree due to
ignorance.
2. In case, the error is found on the face of the record and does not require
the argument of the entire case again. These errors are not related to
wrong decisions made by the court.

9
 3. Any other case, in which case the delusion of the court can be
considered as sufficient ground.
The Apex court in the case of S. Nagraj & Ors. V. State of Karnataka & Anr.,
1993 Supp (4) SCC 595 held that any other sufficient ground has an expanded
meaning. An order passed in case of misinterpretation of the true facts can be
considered as sufficient ground.

Time limit: Article 124 of Limitation Act provided that once the decree or
order is passed, parties shall file the application within 30 days from the date of
passing such decree. The decree or order which is passed after review shall be
final and binding to the parties. It is important to note that the entertaining the
application filed by parties for review is at the discretion of the court. Court can
either entertain or reject the application. In case, the court does not find any
sufficient ground to entertain an application, it can reject the same.

As defined in the law, even the Supreme Court can review its judgementunder
Article 137 of the constitution of India.

Object:
Any human being can make a mistake or error and so do the judges. So, the
procedure of Review has been embedded in the legal system to correct the
mistakes and prevent any miscarriage of justice as held in the case ofS.Nagrajv.
State of Karnataka. The review application is not an appeal or revision made to
the superior court, but it is a request to recall and reconsider the decision made
before the same court.

Circumstances when a review petition is

maintainable:
A review petition is maintainable before the court under the following
circumstances:

When no appeal lies in the case:

According to section 114 of the code, when no appeal lies from an order or a
decree then it can be reviewed by the Court. In the case ofGaneshi Lal v.
SethMool Chand, it was held that taking into consideration sub-clause(c) of

10
Section 114, the application of review against a decree passed by a Small
Causes Court is eligible.

Even if an appeal is dismissed on the ground of being incompetent or

timebarred, the party can go for review procedure as held in the case ofRam
Bakshv. Rajeshwari Kunwar.

When appeal lies in a case but not

preferred:
When the provision of appeal is available but it is not preferred by the aggrieved
party then also a review petition is maintainable. As held in the case of
Sitaramasastry v. Sunderamma an application for review can be presented
before the court only till no appeal is preferred against that order. The court
cannot entertain an application for review when an appeal is already instituted
before making an application for review.

Reference from Small Causes Court:

The court may review the judgement on a reference made by the Small Causes
Court.

Grounds of Review:
There are certain grounds laid down under Rule 1 of Order 47 on which an
application made for the review of a judgement is maintainable:

 On the discovery of new and important matter or evidence

A court can review its judgement when some new and important matter or
evidence is discovered by the applicant which couldn’t be produced or was not
available at the time of passing the decree.
• When the mistakes or errors are apparent on the face of the record
When there is an apparent error on the face of record then the court may review
its judgement or decree. As decided in the case ofKarutha Kritya v.
R.Ramalinga Raju, the error includes an error of fact as well as an error of law.

11
 • Other sufficient reason
The last ground for review is any sufficient reason. Any sufficient ground
considered for review by the court comes under this ground. It could be any
reason which the court feels sufficient to review its judgement in order to avoid
a miscarriage of justice.

In the case ofBank of Bihar v. Mahabir Lal, the Supreme Court laid down
certain reasons which can be considered as a sufficient reason for review such
as- when there has been any misapprehension of the true state of circumstances,
or when the party has not been given fair chance to produce any statement or
evidence, or no notice was sent to the party, or the court has failed to consider a
material fact or evidence, or the court has omitted any statutory provisions.

The limitation period for Review:

The limitation period for filing an application for review as given
underArticle124 of the Limitation Act, 1963is thirty days for a court other than
the Supreme Court from the date of decree or order.

Is the power to review an inherent power?

It is a well-settled matter that the power to review is not an inherent power. It is

required to be either expressly conferred by law or by necessary implications.

Inherent power to review of a Court of plenary jurisdiction

The Court of plenary jurisdiction such as a writ court, in order to prevent a
miscarriage of justice and to correct grave errors, has been empowered to
review its orders. On the leading case law regarding this context
isShivdeoSingh v. State of Punjabin which the same was discussed.
Being the final court of the country who is the last and final to decide on a
matter, it has been empowered to review and to undo injustice. In exceptional
circumstances, it can even exercise the power suo moto.

Who can make a review?

12
As discussed till now, a review is the reconsideration of the same matter by the
same judge who has decided the matter. If the judge who decided is present in
the court, then he alone has jurisdiction to review the matter decided by him. He
is considered to be the best to reconsider the case as only he will be able to
remember what arguments were done and what reason he used to decide that
case.

However, if there is a situation that the same “judicial officer” cannot be

available and any unavoidable reason might prevent the judge who decided the
case to review it, then in such exceptional circumstances any judge or court of
the concurrent jurisdiction can review it and give decision as held in the case
ofReliance Industries Ltd.v. Pravinbhai.

Revision
If we go to the literal meaning, “to revise” stands for “to look again” or “to
look repeatedly at” or “to go through a matter carefully and correct where
necessary”. The High Court has been empowered with the revisional
jurisdiction undersection 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908.

Object:
The object behind empowering the High Court with revisional jurisdiction is to
prevent arbitrary illegal or irregular exercise of jurisdiction by the subordinate
court. Under section 115 the High Court is empowered to keep an eye on the
proceedings of subordinate courts that the proceedings are being conducted in
accordance with the law, under its jurisdiction for which it is bound for and in
furtherance of justice as held in the case ofMajor S.S Khanna v. Brig.
F.J.Dillion.

But, the judges of the subordinate court have absolute jurisdiction to decide a
case and even when they have wrongfully decided a case, they do not commit
any “jurisdictional error”. With the power of revision, the High Court can
correct the jurisdictional error when committed by the subordinate court. The
provision of revision provides an opportunity to the aggrieved party to get their
non-appealable orders rectified.

13
Conditions:
Section 115of the Code of Civil Procedure Code lays down all the
conditions when the High Court can exercise its revisional jurisdiction:

1. The case must be decided.

2. The revisional jurisdiction is exercised when no appeal lies in the case
decided by the subordinate court.
3. The subordinate court has decided such case by:

1. Exercise of jurisdiction which is not vested to that court by

law., or
2. It has failed to exercise the vested jurisdiction, or
3. Illegal exercise of the vested power or with immaterial
irregularity. The High Court is not entitled to vary or reverse the order or
decision of the subordinate court unless such order is in favour of the
party who has applied for revision. Also, the revisional jurisdiction is not
to be exercised if in that matter appeal lies to the High Court.

So, by analysing section 115, we can observe that the revision is done mainly on
jurisdictional errors by the subordinate Court.

Can the power of Revision be exercised if an alternative remedy

isavailable?
The exercise of revisional jurisdiction is upon the discretion of the court and the
parties cannot claim it as a right. In the leading case ofMajor. S.S. Khanna
v.Brig. F.J. Dillion, it was held by the Supreme Court that the court has to take
into consideration several factors before exercising the revisional jurisdiction.
One of the that is considered is the availability of an alternative remedy.

When an alternative and efficacious remedy is available to the aggrieved

party, then the court may not exercise its revisional power under section
115 of the Code.

14
 Distinctions
Reference and Review
S.No. Reference Review

1. The case is referred to the High Court For review, the application is
by the subordinate court and not by the made by the aggrieved party.
party for reference.

2. The matter of reference can be decided A review is done by the court

by the High Courts only. which has passed the decree or
made the order.

3. Reference can be made only when the A review can be done only after
suit, appeal or execution proceeding is the decree or order is passed.
pending.

4. Grounds of reference is different than a Grounds for review

review. are different.

Reference and Revision

S.No. Reference Revision

1. For reference, a case is transferred For revision, the application is made

by a subordinate court to the High to the High Court either by the
Court. aggrieved party of by High Court
suo moto.

2. The grounds for reference is when The ground for revision is

there is reasonable doubt on the jurisdictional errors by the
question of law by the subordinate subordinate court.
court.

Review and Revision

15
S.No. Revision Review

1. Revisional jurisdiction can be A review is done by the court who

exercised only by the High Court. has passed the order or decree
itself.

2. Revisional power is exercised when Review of an order or decree can

no appeal lies to the High Court. be done even if an appeal lies to the
High Court.

3. The High Court can exercise the For review, an application is

revisional power even suo moto(by required to be filed by the
its own motion). aggrieved party.

4. The grounds for revision is mainly The grounds for revision are
on jurisdiction errors. different

5. The order granting the review is The order passed on exercising

appealable. revisional jurisdiction is not
appealable.

Reference and Appeal

S.NO Reference Appeal

1. The power of reference is The right to appeal is the right which has
vested in the court. been conferred to the parties.

2. Reference can always be made An appeal can be made to any court

to the High Court. which superior and it does not need to be
only High Court.

3. The grounds of appeal are much wider

The grounds for reference are
than grounds for reference.
a substantial question of law
and it is narrower.

16
4. Reference can be made only An appeal can be filed only after the
when the suit, order or decree is passed or appealable order has
execution is pending. been made by the subordinate court.

Review and Appeal

S.No. Review Appeal

1. A review can be made only to the An appeal can be filed to any

same court. superior court.

2. The review is a procedure of An appeal is the procedure of

reconsideration of the same matter consideration of the matter by the
by the same judge of the same court. different judge of the superior
court.

3. Grounds of review are narrower than Grounds for appeal are wider than
the grounds for appeal. the grounds of review.

4. There is no provision for the second In an appeal, the provision for the
review. second appeal lies when sufficient
grounds are present.

Revision and Appeal

S.No. Revision Appeal

1. An application for revision lies only to An appeal can be made to any

the High Court. court superior to the court
passing the decree or order.

2. A revisional application can be made

to the High Court for any decision
made by the subordinate court when no
appeal lies for such decision.
An appeal lies only from the
decree or order passed by the
subordinate court.

3. Revisional power of the High Court is The right to appeal has been
totally discretionary. provided by the statue as a
substantive right.

17
4. The grounds for revision is the An appeal lies on the question of
jurisdictional error. fact or question of law or, both.

5. For revision, filing an application is For an appeal a memorandum of

not necessary. The high court may appeal to be filed by the
exercise the revisional power as suo aggrieved party before the
moto. superior court is a must.

Conclusion
18
The provisions for reference, review and revision provided under the Code of
Civil Procedure are different ways by which the court can work more efficiently
for fairness of justice system even when there is no provision of appeal.

Whenever a matter is decided is the Court and the judge passes a decree or order
then there might be circumstances where there has been any mistake or error, or
a party is aggrieved by the order or decree or, there can also be circumstances
where the subordinate court is doubtful on such question of law. And, a general
rule once a judgement is pronounced it cannot be altered by the same court.

So the provision of review, reference and revision have been inserted under the
legal system to avoid a miscarriage of justice.

Where the reference is sought by the subordinate court itself when there is a
doubt on the question of law to the High Court, revisional power is exercised
when there is a jurisdictional error by the subordinate court. The power of
review is vested in the subordinate court itself which has passed the decree or
order.

The process of Review, reference and revision are also very different from
Appeal or Second appeal. The subordinate court can seek reference from the
High Court on its own but for review or revision, an application is required to be
filed. So, all three procedures have different grounds, conditions and
procedures.

Reference:
1. Sitaramasastry v. Sunderamma [(1996) AIR 173 AP]
2. Diwali Bai v. Sadashivdas, [(1900) ILR 24 Bom 310]

19
3. Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Pravinbhai, [(1997) 7 SCC 300]
4. Takwani, C.K, Civil Procedure, Eighth Edition, 2017
5. The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

20