Related to cpc

The question is very short, devoid of details and vague.

You may revert with minimum details if you are really serious about clarification sought here.

Whenever a party to lis feel aggrieved of the judgment / decree /order the party may invoke appropriate relief.

Did you ask your teacher ?

What are the facts? What is the context?

You have not stated facts of the query.

Dear Reader, 

The purpose served by the three remedies within the context of the CPC is indeed different, as is the case for references, reviews, and revisions. A reference under Section 113 of the CPC is generally ordered when an order passed by a lower court raises a question of substantial law requiring pronouncement by a higher Court.

For instance, this is just what happened in Hiralal Agarwal v. State of Bihar, (1977), wherein the Court repeated the dictum that questions like these needed clarification in the form of a reference. An application for review under Order 47 Rule 1 of the CPC would be appropriate, where an error apparent on the face of the record is available.

It is not a step to retry the case but to correct some errors, such as judgmental mistakes or ignored facts, as demonstrated in Kamleshwar Singh v. State of U.P. (1985), which establishes that review can be based on mistakes or new facts that are brought to the notice later. A revision under Section 115 is called for when there is a challenge made against the order passed by an inferior court on grounds of jurisdictional mistakes or non-application of a correct legal principle.

In dealing with the case of Vijay Kumar v. State of Haryana, AIR 2003 SC 213, it was stated that revision lay where the decision of an inferior court was manifestly erroneous or contrary to law, thereby ensuring that the judicial process upholds its dignity.

Hope this helps, if you have any questions, reach out to me at sankalpt44@gmail.com