LO G I N SIGN UP
UPLOADED BY
Rafsan jaman
! a manifest wrong has been done and it is necessary to pass an order to do full and effective
justice.151
! where it appears to the court that there is not sufficient ground for a review, the court shall reject
the application; or
! where the application for a review is heard by more than one judge and the court is equally
divided, the application shall be rejected; and
! where the applicant fails to appear when the application was called for hearing. 152
It is prescribed in rule 7(2) of Order 47, CPC, 1908, that, when an application is reject for the non-
appearance of the applicant, the applicant may apply for an order to have the rejected application restored
to the file. If he can satisfy the court that there was sufficient reason for his non-appearance, on the day of
the hearing of the application the court will order the application to be restored to the file upon such terms
as to costs or otherwise as the court thinks fit and will appoint a day for hearing the same. A notice must
be sent to the opposite party on that behalf.
Decision on Majority:
Where such application is heard by two or more judges, and there are majority of opinion, the
decision shall be according to the opinion of the majority.
151
O. N. Mohindroo vs. District Judge, (1971) 3 SCC 5
152
Ru. 7(2), Or. 47, CPC, 1908
~45~
Appeal:
Limitation:
As it has been stated before every remedy given by the statute has its limitation of time. The statute
has also prescribed a time limitation for making an application for review. Such limitation is not
prescribed in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but to the Limitation Act, 1963. Under Art. 124, of the
Act, the limitation for presenting an application of review is,
153
Ru. 7(1), Or. 47, CPC, 1908
154
Ru. 1(w), Or. 43, CPC, 1908
155
Ru. 7(1), Or. 47, CPC, 1908
~46~
Appeal heard by the different As to the judge hearing Review as the matter of
judge. reconsideration of same subject
matter heard by the same judge.
The grounds for appeal are As to ground The grounds for review are not
wider than review. as wide as appeal.
Under the Limitation Act, 1963, As to Limitation Under the Limitation Act, 1963,
time limitation for appeal is 90 time limitation for review is 30
days to HCD & 30 days in other days.
courts.
Article 116 of the Limitation As to Article enunciating the Article 124 of the Limitation
Act, 1963, has enunciated the time limitation Act, 1963, has enunciated the
time limitation for appeal. time limitation for appeal.
~47~
~48~
Just like appeal and review, revision has come to law for the same purpose, which is to correct any
error or mistake. Revisional power of the High Court is a power to rectify any mistake or error of law of
the judgment given by the lower court.
Diagram: 04
Definition of Revision:
Generally the term “revision” means the act of revising or altering, or the act of rewriting something.
According to the dictionary meaning “to revise” means “to look again” or “look repeatedly at”; “to go
through carefully and correct where necessary”; “to look over with a view to improving or correcting”.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the term “revision” means, “the action of revising,
especially critical or careful examination or perusal with a view to correcting or improving”.
~49~
No definition of the term “revision” has been given by any of the statute, e.g. The General Clauses
It was held in the State Road Commission of West Virginia v. West Virginia Bridge Commission ,
that “revision” means, “a re-examination or careful reading over for correction or improvement” 156
Revision is a purely discretionary remedy granted by a higher court with a view to correcting
miscarriage of justice.
156
112 W.Va. 514, 166 S.E. 11, 13
Physics
Chemistry
Biology
Health Sciences
Ecology
Earth Sciences
Cognitive Science
Mathematics
Computer Science