Does filing a Civil Revision Petition automatically stay the lower court proceedings?

No. Section 115 expressly provides that a revision does not operate as a stay unless the High Court grants a stay.

Can every interlocutory order be revised under Section 115 CPC?

No. Under the current central proviso, the High Court cannot vary or reverse an order made in the course of a suit or proceeding unless, had the order been made in favour of the revision applicant, it would have finally disposed of the suit or other proceeding.

Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 CPC

Q: When is a revision maintainable under Section 115 CPC?

A revision may lie where no appeal lies and the subordinate court has exercised jurisdiction not vested in it, failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it, or acted illegally or with material irregularity in exercising jurisdiction, subject to the statutory proviso and applicable State amendments.

Current-law correction: the central Section 115 CPC no longer contains the older proviso allowing revision merely because an interlocutory order would cause "failure of justice" or "irreparable injury." The present proviso is narrower: interference with an order made during a suit or proceeding is restricted to the statutory final-disposal test.

Section 115 CPC gives the High Court a limited revisional jurisdiction over a case decided by a subordinate court where no appeal lies and the subordinate court has exercised jurisdiction not vested in it, failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it, or acted illegally or with material irregularity while exercising jurisdiction.

No Appeal Revision under the central Section 115 is available only where no appeal lies to the High Court or a subordinate appellate court.

Jurisdictional Error The challenge must fit Section 115(1)(a), (b) or (c); revision is not a routine second appeal on facts.

No Automatic Stay Filing the revision does not itself stay the suit or proceeding. A separate stay order is necessary.

Sample Affidavit for Civil Revision Petition and Stay Application

Adapt the cause title, impugned order, jurisdictional error, case stage, stay grounds and applicable High Court Rules to the actual matter.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ______________________________ AT __________________
CIVIL REVISION JURISDICTION
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. ______ OF 20____

INTERLOCUTORY / MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. ______ OF 20____
IN
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. ______ OF 20____

____________________________ PETITIONER / REVISIONIST

VERSUS

____________________________ RESPONDENT

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF REVISION / STAY APPLICATION

I, ____________________________, son/daughter/wife of ____________________________, aged about ____ years, resident of ________________________________________________________, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as follows:

1. That I am the petitioner/revisionist in the accompanying Civil Revision Petition and am well acquainted with the facts and records of the case. I am therefore competent to swear this affidavit.

2. That the present revision challenges the order dated ________________ passed by the Court of ____________________________ in ____________________________.

3. That no appeal lies against the impugned order to the High Court or to a court subordinate thereto, and the petitioner invokes Section 115 CPC on the following jurisdictional ground(s): ________________________________________________________________________________.

4. That the subordinate court has, as pleaded in the revision petition, exercised jurisdiction not vested in it / failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it / acted illegally or with material irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction, for the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum of revision.

5. That where the impugned order is one made in the course of a suit or other proceeding, the petitioner specifically pleads that, had the order been made in the petitioner's favour, it would have finally disposed of the suit or other proceeding, because ________________________________________________________________________________.

6. That the Civil Revision Petition raises a substantial and bona fide jurisdictional challenge and is not filed merely to seek a rehearing on facts or to delay the proceedings below.

7. That unless further proceedings / operation of the impugned order are stayed, the petitioner will suffer the following serious prejudice: ________________________________________________________________________________.

8. That a prima facie case exists in favour of the petitioner, the balance of convenience supports interim protection, and refusal of stay would risk rendering the revision ineffective or causing prejudice that may not be adequately remedied later.

9. That the respondent can be adequately protected by such terms or conditions as this Hon'ble Court considers appropriate.

10. That the petitioner is aware that the mere filing of a revision does not automatically operate as stay, and therefore specifically seeks an interim order staying ________________________________________________________ pending disposal of the revision.

11. That the accompanying petition/application has been prepared under my instructions. I have read and understood its factual contents and state that they are true and correct to my knowledge and/or based on records believed by me to be true.

12. That the annexures are true copies of the documents referred to in the petition/application, subject to the certification requirements of the applicable High Court Rules.

13. That the application is filed bona fide and in the interest of justice.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION

Verified at ________________ on this ____ day of ________________, 20____, that the contents of paragraphs 1 to ____ above are true and correct to my knowledge and/or based on records and information believed by me to be true, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT

Complete attestation, identification, court-fee and filing requirements under the Rules of the High Court concerned.

Current Section 115 CPC: Revision

Under Section 115(1), the High Court may call for the record of a case decided by a court subordinate to it where no appeal lies, if the subordinate court appears to have:

exercised jurisdiction not vested in it by law;
failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it; or
acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.

The current central proviso restricts variation or reversal of an order made, or an order deciding an issue, in the course of a suit or other proceeding unless the order, had it been made in favour of the revision applicant, would have finally disposed of the suit or other proceeding.

Section 115(2) bars revision of a decree or order against which an appeal lies either to the High Court or to a subordinate court.

Section 115(3) expressly states that a revision does not operate as a stay of the suit or other proceeding before the subordinate court unless the High Court stays it.

Official Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - India Code

Revision Against Interlocutory Orders

The 1999/2002 amendment materially narrowed Section 115. Under the present central proviso, the fact that an interlocutory order may cause inconvenience, hardship or even serious prejudice does not by itself satisfy the statutory test for revisional interference.

The revision applicant should specifically demonstrate how a favourable decision on the impugned order would have finally disposed of the suit or other proceeding. If that condition is not satisfied, Section 115 may not be the appropriate route under the central provision, subject always to applicable State amendments and other available remedies.

Stay Pending Civil Revision

A Civil Revision Petition does not automatically stop the proceedings below. Section 115(3) requires a specific stay order from the High Court.

A stay application should therefore identify exactly what is sought to be stayed, explain the urgency, demonstrate a prima facie revisional case, address balance of convenience and irreparable prejudice, and explain why continuation of the subordinate proceedings would defeat or seriously prejudice the revision.

Scope of Revisional Jurisdiction

Section 115 is jurisdictional in character. The High Court does not sit as a regular appellate court merely to substitute its own view on facts or evidence. The error must relate to jurisdiction or illegality/material irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction within clauses (a), (b) or (c).

The Supreme Court has continued to apply this limited approach. In a 3 May 2024 decision, the Court reiterated, while examining an order interfered with in revision, that the statutory conditions precedent to Section 115 must exist before revisional jurisdiction can properly be exercised.

Supreme Court judgment dated 3 May 2024 - Section 115 CPC

Check State Amendments Before Filing

Section 115 has State-specific amendments in some jurisdictions. The competent revisional forum, pecuniary limits and exact wording may therefore differ from the central provision. Before drafting or filing, check the version applicable in the State concerned as well as the relevant High Court Rules.

Practical Filing Notes

Confirm first that no statutory appeal lies against the impugned decree or order.
Identify the precise clause of Section 115(1)(a), (b) or (c) relied upon.
If challenging an interlocutory order, plead and explain the current proviso's final-disposal requirement.
File the impugned order and relevant pleadings, applications and documents forming the record necessary to understand the jurisdictional error.
Seek stay separately; do not assume the revision itself suspends proceedings below.
State urgency and interim-relief grounds with specificity instead of merely repeating "irreparable loss and injury".
Check applicable State amendments to Section 115 before deciding the revisional forum and maintainability.
Follow the relevant High Court Rules on limitation, court fee, certified copies, affidavit, pagination, attestation and e-filing.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can a revision be filed if an appeal is available?

Ordinarily no. Section 115(2) prevents the High Court from revising a decree or order against which an appeal lies to the High Court or a subordinate court.

Does a revision automatically stay the trial?

No. Section 115(3) expressly states that filing a revision does not operate as stay unless the High Court grants one.

Is "irreparable injury" by itself enough to maintain a revision?

Not under the current central proviso. The older limb referring to failure of justice or irreparable injury is no longer part of the present central text. Maintainability must satisfy the current statutory requirements.

Can the High Court reappreciate evidence under Section 115?

Section 115 is not a general factual appeal. Interference is tied to the jurisdictional errors identified in clauses (a), (b) and (c), subject to the proviso and other statutory restrictions.

Legal information notice: This specimen reflects the central CPC position. Section 115 is subject to State amendments in some jurisdictions, so the applicable State law and High Court Rules must be checked before filing.