Anticipatory Bail

Appeal, Review, Reference & Revision

In India, we have a three tier judiciary. The District Courts, High Courts and the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. The District Courts are generally referred to as the Lower Courts and/ or Trial Courts too. However, in some States the High Courts also try Cases, commanding Original Jurisdiction. The High Courts are also called the Courts of record. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India is the Apex Court of the Country. The Appeal, Review &  Revision lie in all three Courts, i.e. the District Courts, the High Courts and the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, depending on which Court’s Order is being challenged. The facts and circumstances of a particular Case and the question of law involved are relevant for taking a call on whether or not to challenge a order under either of the following jurisdictions- Appeal, Review & Revision. We have numerous Legislations governing the law of Appeal, Review, and Revision. Vital grounds of Appeal are as follows: The Court below has: (i) failed to appreciate/ re-appreciate the evidence on record; (ii) exceeded the jurisdiction. The impugned Order is: (i) perverse; (ii) bad in law; (iii) suffers from grave error of law, etc.  

To know more, go on clicking on the following links 

Civil Jurisdiction 

Criminal Jurisdiction 

Civil Appeal Under The Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 

  • First Appeal 
  • Second Appeal 
  • Grounds for Condonation of delay in preferring Appeal 
  • Stay by Appellate Court 
  • Stay by Court which passed the decree  
  • Dismissal of Appeal for Appellant’s default 
  • Re-admission of Appeal dismissed for default  
  • Re-hearing on Application of Respondent against whom ex parte Decree made  
  • Appeal by Indigent Person  
  • Appeal to the Supreme Court  
  • Power of Appellate Court  
  • Remand of case by the Appellate Court  
  • Where Appellate Court may frame issues and refer them for trial to the Court whose Decree Appealed from  
  • Production of additional evidence before the Appellate Court 
  • Which Court To Be Approached To File Civil Appeal 
  • Relevant Provisions For Civil Appeal 
  • Judgments & Orders On Civil Appeal. 

Civil Review Under The Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 

  • Grounds for Condonation of delay in preferring Review 
  • Stay by Review Court 
  • Dismissal of Review for Reviewist’s default 
  • Power of Review Court  
  • Which Court To Be Approached To File Civil Review 
  • Relevant Provisions For Civil Review. 

Civil Reference Under The Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 

  • Power of Reference Court  
  • When Reference lies. 
  • Relevant Provisions For Civil Reference. 

Civil Revision Under The Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 

The High Court may call for the record of any 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— 

  1. to have exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or 
  2. to have failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or 
  3. 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 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 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. 

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. Also, a revision shall not operate as a stay of suitor in other proceeding before the Court except where such suit or other proceeding is stayed by the High Court.

To know more about Revision [Civil], go on clicking on the following links 

  • Grounds for Condonation of delay in preferring Revision 
  • Stay by Revision Court 
  • Dismissal of Revision for Revisionist’s default 
  • Power of Revision Court  
  • Which Court To Be Approached To File Civil Revision- Revision lies before The District & Sessions Judge | High Courts of various States | Supreme Court Of India, 
  • Relevant Provisions For Civil Revision- Sections-115 Of The Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908. 

Criminal Appeal Under The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 

Criminal Review Under The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 

  • Grounds for Condonation of delay in preferring Review 
  • Stay by Review Court 
  • Dismissal of Review for Reviewist’s default 
  • Power of Review Court  
  • Which Court To Be Approached To File Criminal Review 
  • Relevant Provisions For Criminal Review 
  • Judgments & Orders. 

Criminal Reference Under The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 

  • Power of Reference Court  
  • When Reference lie. 
  • Relevant Provisions For Criminal Reference. 

Criminal Revision Under The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 

  • Grounds for Condonation of delay in preferring Revision 
  • Stay by Revision Court 
  • Dismissal of Revision for Revisionist’s default 
  • Power of Revision Court  
  • Which Court To Be Approached To File Criminal Revision 
  • Relevant Provisions For Criminal Revision 
  • Judgments & Orders.

Criminal Courts 

[In Hierarchical Order] 

  • Supreme Court Of India 
  • High Courts Of Various States 
  • District & Sessions Judge [D&SJ]  
  • Metropolitan Magistrates [MM] 
  • Judicial Magistrates [JM] 
  • Mediators & Conciliators. 

Other Criminal Foras 

  • Crime Against Women Cell [CAW Cell] 
  • Central Bureau of Investigation [CBI] 
  • Central Vigilance Commission [CVC] 
  • Comptroller and Auditor General of India [CAG]. 
  • Delhi Commission for Women [DCW] 
  • Enforcement Directorate [ED] 
  • Indian Govt. Limbs & Foreign Missions 
  • Intelligence Bureau (IB) 
  • National Commission for Women [NCW] 
  • National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO) 
  • Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) 
  • Serious Fraud Investigation Office [SFIO]- SFIO is a multi-disciplinary organization under Ministry of Corporate Affairs, consisting of experts in the field of accountancy, forensic auditing, law, information technology, investigation, company law, capital market and taxation for detecting and prosecuting or recommending for prosecution white-collar crimes/frauds. 
  • Senior Citizen Cell. 
  • Women Helpline Nos. 

Civil Courts 

  • Supreme Court Of India 
  • High Courts Of Various States 
  • District & Sessions Judges [D&SJ] 
  • Family Courts  
  • Senior Civil Judges  
  • Civil Judges 
  • Mediators & Concilliators. 

Other Civil Fora 

  • Rent Controller 

Legal Provisions Governing Civil Appeals, Review, Reference & Revisions 

Civil Law Under The Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 

Criminal Law Under The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 

Legal Provisions Governing Appeal, Reference, Review And Revision Under Civil Laws 

The Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 

PART VII: APPEALS 

Appeals from original decrees 

  • Section-96: Appeal from original decree 
  • Section-97: Appeal from final decree where no appeal from preliminary decree 

Appeals from appellate decrees 

Appeals from orders 

General Provisions relating to appeals 

Appeals to the Supreme Court 

PART VIII: REFERENCE, REVIEW AND REVISION 

Legal Provisions Governing Appeal, Reference, Review And Revision Under Criminal Laws 

The Code Of Criminal Procedure Act, 1973 

CHAPTER VI : PROCESSES TO COMPEL APPEARANCE 

C.- Proclamation and attachment 

  • Section-86: Appeal from order rejecting application for restoration of attached property 

CHAPTER XXVI: PROVISIONS AS TO OFFENCES AFFECTING THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE 

CHAPTER XXIX: APPEALS 

  • Section-372. No appeal to lie unless otherwise provided 
  • Section-373: Appeal from orders requiring security or refusal to accept or rejecting surety for keeping peace or good behaviour 
  • Section-374: Appeals from convictions 
  • Section-378: Appeal in case of acquittal 
  • Section-382: Petition of appeal 
  • Section-386: Powers of the Appellate Court 
  • Section-388. Order of High Court on appeal to be certified to lower Court. 
  • Section-389: Suspension of sentence pending the appeal; release of appellant on bail 
  • Section-391: Appellate Court may take further evidence or direct it to be taken 
  • Section-393: Finality of judgments and orders on appeal 
  • Section-394: Abatement of appeals 

CHAPTER XXX: REFERENCE AND REVISION 

CHAPTER XXXI: TRANSFER OF CRIMINAL CASES 

  • Section-406: Power of Supreme Court to transfer cases and appeals 
  • Section-407: Power of High Court to transfer cases and appeals 
  • Section-408: Power of Sessions Judge to transfer cases and appeals 

CHAPTER XXXIII: PROVISIONS AS TO BAIL AND BONDS 

Judgments: Appeal Under Civil Laws 

Citations: Appeals Under The Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 

  • H. Lyngdoh & Ors. Vs. Gromlyn Lyngdoh, Date Of Judgment- 02/03/1971, Bench: Reddy, P. Jaganmohan & Shelat J.M, JJ, Supreme Court Of India, Citation: 1971 AIR 1110 1971 SCR (3) 903 1971 SCC (1) 754 [Full PDF Judgment]- Section-107. Powers of Appellate Court. Duty of the appellate Judges in dealing with the judgment of the lower court- In the objective discharge of judicial functions there is little justification nay, none-at-all to assume any attitude other than of judicial restraint or to use a language while referring to one’s colleagues other than that which has been hitherto adopted by long usage. 
  • Ishwari Prasad Mishra Versus Mohammad Isa, Date Of Judgment: 27/08/1962, Bench: Gajendragadkar P.B., Gupta K.C. Das & Dayal Raghubar, JJ, Supreme Court Of India, Citation: 1963 AIR 1728= 1963 SCR (3) 722 [Full PDF Judgment]- Section-107. Powers of Appellate Court. Duty of the appellate Judges in dealing with the judgment of the lower court- Criticism of the trial Judge or the witnesses-Extravagant language to be avoided.- The High Court made some observations criticizing some of the witnesses examined in the case suggesting that they had consipired to give false evidence.- The Supreme Court after carefully considering the matter fully was satisfied that the amputations made by the High Court against the impartiality and the objectivity of the approach adopted by the trial Judge were wholly unjustified.- Held, that the High Court erred in using extravagant language in criticizing the trial court; that the use of strong language and imputation of corrupt motives should not be made light-heartedly because the judge against whom the imputations are made has no remedy in law to vindicate his position.  Held, further, that the High Court was, similarly, in error in its criticism of some the witnesses examined in the case as showing a tendency to regard every witness whose evidence the High Court did not feel inclined to accept, as a perjuror and a conspirator. 
  • Management Of Narendra & Company Private Limited Versus The Workmen Of Narendra & Company, Civil Appeal No.14 Of 2016, Judgment Dated: 04.01.2016, Bench: Kurian Joseph, & Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ, Supreme Court Of India [Full PDF Judgment]- In an intra-court appeal, on a finding of fact, unless the appellate Bench reaches a conclusion that the finding of the Single Bench is perverse, it shall not disturb the same. Merely because another view or a better view is possible, there should be no interference with or disturbance of the order passed by the Single Judge, unless both sides agree for a fairer approach on relief. 
  • Sujatha Etc. Etc.  Versus State Of Kerala And Ors., Appeal (Crl.) 652 of 1989, Date Of Judgment: 19/09/1994 Bench: Madan Mohan Punchhi & K. Jayachandra Reddy, JJ, Supreme Court Of India, Citation: 1994 SUPPL. (3) SCR 646 [Full PDF Judgment]- Held, “A judge should take special care in making disparaging remarks against a judge of a subordinate court or against a person or authority whose conduct comes in for con-sideration before him in cases to be decided by him. Making uncalled for remarks against the said persons or authorities would be violation of judicial discipline,”. 

Citations: Appeals Under The Income Tax, 1961 

  • Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. Versus Director Of Income Tax, ITA No.131 Of 2003 With ITA No.134 Of 2003,  Judgment Dated: 31.01.2011, Bench: A.K. Sikri & Reva Khetrapal, JJ, Delhi High Court [Full PDF Judgment]- Following substantial questions of law were involved in this Case: ―(i) the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the amounts received by the Appellant (a non-resident) from its non-resident customers for availing transponder capacity was chargeable to tax in India where the satellite was not stationed over Indian airspace and in directing how much income is to be determined? (ii) the Tribunal was right in holding that the Appellant had a business connection in India through or from which it earned income? (iii) the Tribunal was justified in holding that the amount paid to the Appellant by its customers represented income by way of royalty as the said expression is defined in Explanation 2 to Section 9(1) (vi) of the Income Tax Act? (iv) the Tribunal was justified in holding that the customers of the Appellant were either carrying on business in India or had a source of income in India and, hence, the amount received by the Appellant from its customers were chargeable to tax in India? (v) Whether the Tribunal was justified in admitting the additional ground raised by the revenue seeking to assess the amounts received by the Appellant as fees for technical services in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)? (vi) Whether the Tribunal was justified in directing the Assessing Officer to allow the expenditure relatable to India only whilst computing the income chargeable to tax in India? (vii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal erred in holding that depreciation was admissible to the appellant only on a proportionate basis?- (viii) Whether the ITAT is right in law in holding that the interest under Section 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 should be calculated by giving benefit to the assessee of tax deductible under Section 195 by the payer though no such deduction in fact was made? (ix) Whether Ld. ITAT is right in law in holding that sec.9(1)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is not applicable in the case of the assessee? (x) Whether the Ld. ITAT has erred in not deciding the issue whether income of the assessee is taxable u/s 9(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (xi) Whether ITAT is right in holding that transponders cannot be regarded as equipment under Explanation 2 clause (iva) to section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?

Citations: Appeals Under Rent Laws 

  • Damodar Lal Versus Sohan Devi And Others, Civil Appeal No. 231 OF 2015, Judgment dated: 05.01.2016, Bench: T. S. Thakur, CJI, Kurian Joseph, J, Supreme Court Of India [Full PDF Judgment]- Rent matter- Landlord had been successful both in the trial court and the first appellate court, however, the High Court in second appeal went against him on a pure question of fact- Landlord filed SLP in Supreme Court- The Supreme Court reversed the High Court Order, as follows:  “… approach made by the High Court has been wholly wrong, if not, perverse. It should not have interfered with concurrent findings of the trial court and first appellate court on a pure question of fact. The strained effort made by the High Court in second appeal to arrive at a different finding is wholly unwarranted apart from being impermissible under law.”- Landlord succeeds. 

Citations: Appeals Under Criminal Laws 

  • Jamiluddin Nasir v. State of West Bengal, Criminal Appeal No(S). 1240-1241/2010, Judgment Dated- 21/05/2014, Bench- A.K. Patnaik & Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, JJ, Citations- 2014 AIR(SC) 2587: 2014(7) SCC 443: 2014(7) SCALE 571: 2014(5) Supreme 135: 2014(5) SLT 588: 2014 CrLJ 3589: 2014(3) SCC(Cr) 230: 2014(3) Crimes 335(SC) 
  • Ram Phal Versus State & Ors., Crl.A.1415/2012, Judgment Dated: 28.05.2015, S. Ravindra Bhat, Pradeep Nandrajog, Gita Mittal, JJ., Delhi High Court [PDF Full Bench Judgment]- Maintainability of Appeal by the “Victim” U/S-S-372 Of Cr.P.C.- Judgment, Namely, Chattar Singh V. Subhash And Ors., 176 (2011) DLT 356 Overruled. 
  • Sadhu Saran Singh Versus State Of U.P. And Ors., Criminal Appeal Nos. 1467-1468 Of 2005, Judgment Dated: 26.02.2016, Bench: DIPAK MISRA & N.V. RAMANA, JJ, Supreme Court Of India [Full PDF Judgment]- Appeal against acquittal- Issue, extent & scope of the power of the Appellate Court in an Appeal against acquittal- “18…..This Court, while enunciating the principles with regard to the scope of powers of the appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal, in the case of Sambasivan and Others V. State of Kerala, (1998) 5 SCC 412, has held : “18…..The principles with regard to the scope of the powers of the appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal are well settled. The powers of the appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal are no less than in an appeal against conviction. But where on the basis of evidence on record two views are reasonably possible the appellate Court cannot substitute its view in the place of that of the trial Court. It is only when the approach of the trial Court in acquitting an accused is found to be clearly erroneous in its consideration of evidence on record and in deducing conclusions therefrom that the appellate Court can interfere with the order of acquittal”. – “20. This Court in Chandrappa V. State of Karnataka, (2007) 4 SCC 415, after referring to a catena of decisions, has laid down the following general principles with regard to powers of the appellate Court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal: “42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of the appellate Court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge : (1)An appellate Court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded. (2) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power an appellate Court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law. (3) Various expressions, such as, ‘substantial and compelling reasons’, ‘good and sufficient grounds’, ‘very strong circumstances’, ‘distorted conclusions’, ‘glaring mistakes’, etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of ‘flourishes of language’ to emphasise the reluctance of an appellate Court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the Court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion. (4) An appellate Court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent Court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial Court. (5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate Court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial Court.”.  – Resolving the issue of inconsistency between the medical and ocular evidence the court relied on the following legal proposition, “21(iii)….This Court in Darbara Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 476, wherein this Court has held : “…. So far as the question of inconsistency between the medical evidence and the ocular evidence is concerned, the law is well settled that, unless the oral evidence available is totally irreconcilable with the medical evidence, the oral evidence would have primacy. In the event of contradictions between medical and ocular evidence, the ocular testimony of a witness will have greater evidentiary value vis-à-vis medical evidence and when medical evidence makes the oral testimony improbable, the same becomes a relevant factor in the process of evaluation of such evidence. It is only when the contradiction between the two is so extreme that the medical evidence completely rules out all possibilities of the ocular evidence being true at all, that the ocular evidence is liable to be disbelieved.”.- Acquittal by the HC reversed, handing out life imprisonment, modifying the death penalty awarded by the trial court.  
  • Sidhartha Vashisht @ Manu Sharma, Criminal Appeal No.-179 Of 2007, Judgment Dated: 19.04.2014, Bench: P. Sathasivam, Swatanter Kumar, JJ, Supreme Court Of India [Full PDF Judgment]- Conviction Upheld. 

Citations: Revision Under Criminal Laws 

  • State of Maharashtra vs. Jagmohan Singh Kuldip Singh Anand, 2004 CriL.J. 4254 
  • Duli Chand v. Delhi Admn., (1997) 4 SCC 122 
  • Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal and Anr., AIR 1979 SC 366 
  • State of Orissa vs. Mathuri Mallik and Anr., 1979 Crl.L.J.508 
  • State of Gujarat vs. Rohit and Anr., 1985 Crl.L.J. 556 
  • Uma Nath Pandey Ors. Vs. State of UP & Anr. AIR 2009 SC 2375.

Kindly CLICK HERE, call our helpline at (+91) 98-712-712-05, or e-mail us at hellocounsel@gmail.com if you wish to talk to a lawyer or are facing any other Legal Issue and want to have Legal Consultations with the empaneled Lawyers at Hello Counsel.

Need A Lawyer? We Can Get You One.

Fill This Form If You Wish To Hire A Lawyer
Know More

Find A Lawyer

Fill This Form If You Wish To Retain A Lawyer
Know More

Retain A Lawyer

Like us? Leave us a review.