Brief Note on Appeal

An appeal is a legal process in which a higher court reviews the decision of a lower court
to determine if any errors were made in the original ruling. The party making the appeal,
called the appellant, requests that the higher court overturn or modify the decision
made by the lower court. The process typically involves the submission of written
arguments and may also involve oral arguments presented in court. The outcome of an
appeal can result in the original decision being upheld, overturned, or modified.

Advantages & Disadvantages of Appeal

Advantages of Appeal:

• Provides a means for correcting errors made by lower courts.

• Allows for the re-examination of evidence and testimony.
• Can result in a more just and fair outcome for the parties involved.
• Increases the transparency and accountability of the legal system.
• Provides an opportunity for legal precedent to be clarified or established.
• Can lead to the development of a more consistent and coherent body of law.

Disadvantages of Appeal:

• Can be time-consuming and costly for all parties involved.

• Can prolong the resolution of a case and cause additional stress for the parties
involved.
• Can create uncertainty and confusion for the parties involved.
• May lead to inconsistent decisions and confusion in the law.
• Can lead to additional expenses and legal fees for all parties involved.
• May lead to increased burden on the higher courts and the legal system as a
whole.

Brief Note on Revision

Revision refers to the process of asking a court to review and potentially change a
decision that it has previously made. It is a legal procedure that allows parties to
request a higher court to re-examine the decision of a lower court. The goal of revision is
to correct errors or injustices that may have occurred in the initial decision.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Revision

Advantages of Revision:

• It allows for the correction of errors or injustices in the original decision.

 • It can take into account new evidence or information that was not available
during the original trial.
• It can provide a means for parties to address dissatisfaction with the original
outcome.
• It can lead to a more fair and just resolution of the case.
• It allows for the legal system to adapt to changing circumstances and laws.
• It can provide a means for a higher court to review the decision of a lower court,
ensuring consistency and fairness across the judicial system.

Disadvantages of Revision:

• It can be time-consuming and costly for both the parties and the court system.
• It can prolong the resolution of the case and delay finality for the parties.
• It can increase the burden on an already overburdened court system.
• It can create uncertainty and confusion for parties, witnesses, and other involved
parties
• It can lead to inconsistent and conflicting decisions if multiple appeals are
taken.
• It may lead to inconsistent interpretation of the law.

Difference Between appeal and revision.

• Purpose: The main purpose of an appeal is to challenge a decision made by a

lower court or administrative body, while the purpose of a revision is to correct
errors or omissions in a previous decision or order.
• Jurisdiction: An appeal is usually filed with a higher court or appellate body, while
a revision is filed with the same court or administrative body that made the
original decision.
• Grounds for filing: An appeal can be filed on the grounds of errors of law or fact,
while a revision can be filed on the grounds of newly discovered evidence or
other similar reasons.
• Time limits: There are usually strict time limits for filing an appeal, while revisions
can often be filed at any time.
• Burden of proof: In an appeal, the burden of proof is on the appellant to show
that the lower court’s decision was in error, while in a revision, the burden of
proof is on the party seeking the revision to show that the original decision was
incorrect.
• Scope of review: An appellate court will generally review the entire record of the
lower court’s proceedings, while a court or administrative body hearing a revision
will generally only review the specific issues raised in the revision.
• Standards of review: An appellate court will typically review the lower court’s
decision for an abuse of discretion or errors of law, while a court or
 administrative body hearing a revision will typically apply a more lenient
standard of review.
• Effect of filing: Filing an appeal usually stays the execution of the lower court’s
decision, while filing a revision does not usually have any effect on the execution
of the original decision.
• Finality: An appeal can result in a final disposition of the case, while a revision
will usually result in a modification or amendment of the original decision.

Difference Between appeal and review.

• Review is mostly concerned with the correctness of the legal matters of a

decision whereas an appeal is mostly concerned with the correctness of the
decision itself.
• Review is filed in the same court whereas appeal is filed in a higher court.
• Appeal is a statutory right of the individual whereas review is a discretionary right
of the court.
• Procedural irregularity, impropriety, irrationality, and illegality form the basis of a
review whereas there can be grounds of dissatisfaction or disappointment for
filing an appeal.
• An appeal is a request to change or modify the decision or verdict whereas
review is a request to look into the legality of the ruling.

Difference Between reference and review.

• Meaning and Scope-

In review The act of reconsideration, looking again, or re-examining by the
same court and judge.
In revision High Court revisiting and potentially modifying judgments from
subordinate courts.
• Objective- Correct errors affecting party interests; same court and judge review
their judgment;
Address illegality, irregularity, or impropriety; High Court revises judgments from
subordinate courts.
• Provisions in CPC- Defined under Section 114 of the CPC;
Defined under Section 115 of the CPC.
• Initiation and Authority- Typically initiated by a party involved; authority within
the court that issued judgment;
Initiated by High Court (suo moto or by an aggrieved party); High Court serves as
revising authority.
• Time Frame for Application- No specified limitation; generally expected within a
reasonable time;
Limited to 90 days from the date of judgment or decree.
 • Nature of Errors Addressed- Focuses on discovery of new matter, apparent
mistakes, or other sufficient reasons;
Addresses matters of jurisdiction, illegality, irregularity, or impropriety in
subordinate court proceedings.
• Court Involvement Internal process within the same court and judge;
Involves the High Court as an external, superior judicial authority

Return of plaints.

The provisions regarding the return of plaint are provided under the Order 7 Rules 10,
10A, 10B, CPC, 1908. The court, if it found that it does not have jurisdiction in the suit,
can return by an order that the plaint to be presented in the proper court. The defect of
jurisdiction can be of territorial, Pecuniary or Subject matter.

Return of Plaint means when a court found that in any suit presented before it has no
jurisdiction to try it, then the trial court may, by the order of returning the plaint, may
return the plaint to be presented to the proper court.

Procedure for returning the Plaint:-

On the returning of the plaint, the court is required to endorse on the plaint the
following particulars [Rule 10 (2)]:-

1. Date of Presentation

2. Date of Returning

3. Name of the party which presented the plaint

4. Reasons for returning the plaint.

Grounds for return of plaint:-

The court shall return a plaint on the following grounds:-

• Court has no jurisdiction: The term jurisdiction refers to the legal authority, to do
justice in accordance with the means provided by law and subject to the
limitation imposed by law. The court should return the plaint when it has no
jurisdiction to try it.
• Objection to jurisdiction: If the party to the suit has any objection as to the
jurisdiction of the court, the court may return the plaint.

Amar Chand v. Union of India, AIR 1973 SC 313

It was held that when a plaint is filed in the proper court, after getting it back from
the wrong court, it cannot be said to be a continuation of the suit and the suit must
be deemed to commence when a plaint is filed in the proper court.

The order of returning the plaint is appealable under Order 43 Rule 1.

 As per the above-stated matter, it can be said, that jurisdiction of the court is
necessary, to obtain adjudication and the decision of court without jurisdiction is a
nullity in the eyes of the law, and not binding of anyone, though this is subject to the
exceptions of section 21 of CPC.

Order and Decree.

As per Section 2 (14), The formal expression of any decision of a civil court that is not
a Decree is Order. In a suit, a court may take certain decisions on objective
considerations and those decisions must contain a discussion of the matters at
issue in the suit and the reasons which led the court to pass the order. However, if
those decisions fall short of a decree, they are orders.

In a civil suit, several facts might be alleged and the court may be required to rule on
several claims. In simple terms, a decree is the ruling of the court regarding the
claims of the parties of the suit. For example, in a suit between A and B, A may claim
that a particular property P belongs to A. After hearing all the arguments, the court
will rule in the favor of either A or B. The final decision of the court regarding this
claim i.e. whether the property belongs to A or B is a decree.

As per Section 2(2), a decree is the formal expression of an adjudication which, so far
as regards the Court expressing it, conclusively determines the rights of the parties with
regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit. It can be final or preliminary.

Ammendment of Pleading.

Order VI, Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code talks about amendment of pleadings.

The Court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to alter or amend his
pleading in manner and terms as may be, and all such amendments shall be made as
may be necessary for determining the real questions in controversy between the
parties:

Provided that no application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has
commenced unless the Court concludes that despite due diligence, the party could not
have raised the matter before the commencement of trial.”

The original provision under Order 6 Rule 17 of C.P.C. is that at any stage of the
proceedings, the Court may entertain an application seeking amendment of the
pleadings if it is necessary to determine the real issues in the dispute between the
parties.

That provision was deleted from the 1999 Civil Procedure Code (Amendment). This
omission was made to ensure consistency with the changes in the new Civil Code. Yet,
later, the Civil Procedure Code (Amendment), 2000 repealed it. The amendment
allowed the Court the power to authorize, with some restrictions, the submission of
claims.

The Court could allow amendment of pleadings at any stage of the proceedings. The
Court will enable parties to modify and amend their pleadings in a manner that is
justifiable and subject to conditions, and all pleadings will be changed as required to
settle substantive disputes among parties.