Select a page

Difference Between Review, Revision and Appeal in Civil Cases


Before we proceed to understand the difference between review, revision and appeal under Civil Procedure Code, 1908, let’s look at the Bare Act.

Review is a provision under Section 114, which states:

Subject as aforesaid, any person considering himself aggrieved-

by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed by this Code, but from which no appeal has been preferred,

by a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed by this Court, or

by a decision on a reference from a Court of Small Causes, may apply for a review of judgment to the Court which passed the decree or made the order, and the Court may make such order thereon as it thinks fit.

Dictionary meaning of the word review is an act of carefully looking at or examining the quality or condition of something or someone: examination or inspection. As per Black’s Dictionary, a review is “to re-examine judicially. A reconsideration; second view or examination; revision; consideration for purposes of correction.”

Review is be filed by the aggrieved in the same court where the order or decree is passed. It is a discretionary right of the court and not statutory right. According to section 114 of CPC, any person aggrieved by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed but not filed, or a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed, can file a review petition in the same court which passed such decree or order on the following grounds:

  1. When new and important matter or evidence is discovered which after the exercise of due diligence was not within his knowledge, or could not be produced by him at the time when the decree or order was passed;
  2. When there is any mistake or error apparent on the face of the record;
  3. When there is any other sufficient reason.

There is not provision of reviewing an order already reviewed, unlike an appeal where there is a provision of second appeal.  Review is dealt with under Section 114 and Order 47 of the CPC .


Review by the Supreme Court:

Article 137 of the Constitution confers power on the Supreme Court to review its own judgments subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament or the Rules made under clause (c) of Article 145. The power of the Supreme Court, therefore, cannot be curtailed by the Code of Civil Procedure.

Ram Singh and Others v Union of India Writ Petition 274 OF 2014, Civil Original Jurisdiction, Writ Petition No 274 OF 2014, Supreme Court of India judgement dated March 17, 2015

Lily Thomas vs Union Of India & Ors. on 5 April, 2000, Equivalent citations: 2000 (2) ALD Cri 686, 2000 (1) ALT Cri 363, 2001 (1) BLJR 499, 2000 CriLJ 2433, II (2000) DMC 1 SC, JT 2000 (5) SC 617, 2000 (4) SCALE 176, (2000) 6 SCC 224, 2000 (2) UJ 1113 SC



Revision is defined under section 115 of CPC as

 [(1)] The High Court may call for the record of an case which has been decided by any Court subordinate to such High Court and in which no appeal lies thereto, and if such subordinate Court appears

(a) to have exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or

(b) to have failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or

(c) to have acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity, the High Court may make such order in the case as it thinks fit :

[Provided that the High Court shall no, 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 had been made in favour of the party applying for revision, would have finally disposed of the suit or other proceedings, or

(b) the order, if allowed to stand, would occasion a failure of justice or cause irreparable injury to the party against whom it was made.]

[(2) The High Court shall not, under this section, vary or reverse any decree or order against which an appeal lies either to the High Court or to any Court subordinate thereto.

Explanation.In this section, the expression “any case which has been decided” includes any order made, or any order deciding an issue in the course of a suit or other proceeding.]


The dictionary definition of revision is “a change or a set of changes that corrects or improves something”. Per Black’s Law dictionary it is “a re-examination or careful reading over for correction or improvement.”


Revision means re-examination of cases which involve the illegal assumption, non-exercise or irregular exercise of Jurisdiction. Revisional jurisdiction does not confer any substantive right, and the right of revision is merely a privilege granted to an aggrieved. In Revision the court can interfere, if the case brought before it is a decided case by subordinate court, and when the same is not appealable. If this condition is fulfilled, the revisional court may interfere to check, where the subordinate court has:

(a) exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it, or

(b) failed to exercise a jurisdiction vested in it, or (c) acted in exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.

The power of revision is exercised by the court superior to the court which decided the case, thus only High Court has this power and no appeal lies from an order made in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction.


Gurudassing Nawoosing Panjwani v The State of Maharashtra and Others, Civil Appeal Jurisdiction, Civil Appeal No 5102 OF 2006, Supreme Court of India judgment dated November 6, 2015




Under CPC, 1908, there is an entire part VII on appeals comprising of sections 96 to 112, however the expression appeal has not been defined in the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. Right to First appeal is a substantive right but Second appeal is only allowed on substantial question of law.  Appeal means the removal of a cause from an inferior court to a superior one for the purpose of testing the soundness of the decision of the inferior court. Superior court need not be High Court but may be a District Court.

Appeal is the continuation of the original proceedings before a superior court. The statutory right of appeal confers the right of re-hearing the whole dispute, unless expressly restricted in scope and the appellate court is not confined to the reasons which have been given by subordinate court for its decision. In-accordance with section 96 of CPC an appeal lies against all decrees passed by a court in the exercise of original civil jurisdiction, except consent decree, and decree passed in suit filed under section (9) of the Specific Relief Act, and a final decree, the preliminary decree of which is not challenged. Appeal also lies against an order if so provided for by section 104, or order 43 CPC. An appeal abates if the legal representatives of a deceased party are not brought on the record within the time allowed by law.

As soon as judgment is pronounced against party, right to appeal arises. Right to appeal doesn’t arise when adverse decision is given, but on the day suit is instituted i.e. proceedings commenced, right to appeal get conferred. Thus, it can be said the Right to appeal is appeal substantive right vested in parties from the date suit instituted.

Who can appeal?

  1. Any party to the suit, who is adversely affected by the decree or the transferee of interest of such party has been adversely affected by the decree provided his name was entered into record of suit.
  2. An auction purchaser from an order in execution of a decree to set aside the same on the grounds of fraud.
  3. Any person who is bound by the decree and decree would operate res judicata against him and is permitted by the Appellate Court to file an appeal.

Consent Decrees are not appealable. In Punjab National Bank vs. Lakshmichand Rah reported in AIR 2000 Madhya Pradesh, High Court held that “It may incidentally be further seen that even the Code of Civil Procedure does not provide for an appeal under Section 96(3) against a consent decree. The Code of Civil Procedure also intends that once a consent decree is passed by Civil Court finality is attached to it. Such finality cannot be permitted to be destroyed, particularly under the Legal Services Authorities Act, as it would amount to defeat the very aim and object of the Act with which it has been enacted, hence, we hold that the appeal filed is not maintainable.”



P.T. Thomas vs Thomas Job on 4 August, 2005, Supreme Court of India


You can read about IPC 498A at 498A Myth Buster
If you have any query related to gender biased laws join Sahodar Whatsapp Groups by sending Whatsapp message “Subscribe” to Sahodar Trust No. 9811850498.



  1. S.Susandam Musthabi August 22, 2018 Reply

    sir, My name is S.Susandam Musthabi. I am living in Mihijam of Jamtara district. My phone no will be sent to you in Whatsapp.

    I and my mother Mrs. Ratna Mustafi jointly gave Rs 4,17,000 to a person called Rakesh Lal in 2014 September. He promised to repay it within January 2014 and signed a agreement for that. He took the money for standing in election. And for the purpose of lending him we had borrowed Rs 4,00,000 from SBI against our two joint FDs made in the name of me and my mother. As per the bond he agreed to pay the SBI interest and return the loan to SBI until our two FDs are released from SBI.

    He promised to pay within Janaury 2014. The promised date passed but he did not pay, but gave three canara bank cheques, two in my mother’s name (for Rs 250,000 and 40,000) and one in my name for Rs 2,00,000. Altogether he gave three cheques for Rs 4,90,000 to cover the loan Rs 4,17,000 and the SBI interest, as promised.

    All cheques bounced without money in his account. We sent a notice to him within fifteen days, but he did not respond to that, so I and my mother seperately filed cases against him under N.I.Act 138 within another fifteen days. fortunately I had a lawyer friend who helped me in writing the draft without taking money. As I am suffering with less income I myself argued the case till last. The case went in the lower court of Jamtara district for one year and eight months. As my evidences are stronger the S.D.J.M of the court convicted Rakesh Lal and gave a verdict, according to which the convict should go two years imprisonment, and pay fine to court and compensation to victims.

    We were satisfied with the verdict of lower court, but the convict appealed to district court and again went in bail. The criminal appeals were against the state and us. The two criminal appeal cases were running in the appellate court for six months, but finally appellate court dismissed the criminal appeal on 7th August 2018, but the appellate court judge modified the judgment of the lower court to that extent that we may not get anything from the convicted.

    The lower court had ordered in my mother’s case….two years punishment to convicted, Rs 4,00,000 fine to court and Rs 4,00,000 compensation to my mother; and my mother could claim that compensation by law. And if the convicted failed to pay the fine he should stay two more months punishment.
    The appellate court modified two years punishment to just one year. And it cancelled the compensation and kept only the fine. And the if the fine can’t be paid the convicted should stay two more months in jail.

    Similarly the lower court had said in my case….two years punishment to convicted, Rs 3,00,000 fine, and Rs 3,00,000 compensation to me, and I can claim for compensation by law. And if the convicted failed to pay the fine he should stay two more months in jail.
    The appellate court modified two years punishment to just one year. And it cancelled the compensation and kept only the fine. And if the fine can’t be paid the convicted should stay two more months in jail.

    The modifications show that the convicted may stay in jail for 14 months and walk out without paying anything to us in both cases. If there had been compensation we could claim for that by money suiting case, but now there is no scope for that, as the compensations were set aside; thus the modified Judgment has made us grieved and dissatisfied. We are very sad at such partial Judgment. My mother is a senior citizen of 70, and our two FDs are stuck in the SBI, but the Judge have not shown any mercy to us. The modified Judgment does not give any assurance for our money recovery, as the compensation part is cut.

    What should we do in this condition? I have the courage to go to high court and argue myself. As my mother is not educated I myself argued for both of us in lower court, but in the appellate/district court the Judge did not behave properly with me…he insulted me, so I had to keep a lawyer paying money. I struggled and finally the Judgment is partial to us. I suspect that the appellate court Judge may have taken bribe from the convicted to write a partial Judgment; such things are not new in Jharkhand. I dont have evidence to prove the bribing, just I am suspecting. When the case was going in lower court the accused bribed the clerks to delay the case dates.

    Can I ask the appellate court to review the Judgment? Please advise, what should be done now? What is appropriate to be done at this situation?

  2. Dalipsingh 9465209221 December 24, 2017 Reply

    I want to file curtive against case no RP 2647 of 2017. so i want to know at this time. suggest to me as soon as possible thanks for the matter.

  3. Dalipsingh 9465209221 December 24, 2017 Reply

    RP 2647 of 2017 what i going to curtive petition please me.

  4. Ravindra kumar December 3, 2017 Reply

    Good morning sir/madam. An already i had filed a writ petition in kolkata high court since 2014.but now i want to file review against the court order .so i want to know at this time i can file the review.kinldy suggest to me as soon as posible.thanking you.

    • Shonee Kapoor December 6, 2017 Reply

      Question is not clear, please send complete facts using contact me form

  5. Devesh May 7, 2017 Reply

    Hello sir just wanna ask you can additional evidence possible to bring in Revision appeal in Highcourt if it’s very important factor of the case but unfortunately skip by the lawyer in appeal & also in Trial ..if yes then how it’s possible please help

  6. opio ronald April 12, 2017 Reply

    why are the files cannot be downloaded

  7. RAMESH March 5, 2017 Reply

    Sir, Very Good Article. i wish to know about Review S-114 CPC by same family Court.
    Hon SC in many cases held that CRPC 125 is basically a Civil proceedings since State is not the party.
    To avail a remedy if available – Can aggrieved Husband before going to HC seek Review of CRPC 125 Judgement U/S -114 CPC and why not considering FC Act.
    AND whether he can file Objections U/S-47 CPC in Execution of CRPC-125 considering FC Act.

    • Site Admin April 3, 2017 Reply

      Dear Ramesh,

      You should file application u/s 114 and O47 R1 CPC r/w S.151 CPC for review.

      I also provide legal drafting for such applications, please check my services at


Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.