Advocate Abhi Sheth

Appeal is a process of re-examination of the judgment and decree, or order or the decisions passed by the original court is a suit or in a case. The expression “appeal” has not been defined in the code, but it may be defined as “the judicial examination of the decision by a higher court of the decision of an inferior court”.

Revision is re-working and re-writing. Revision, meaning "to see again," takes place during the entire writing process as we change words, rewrite sentences, and shift paragraphs from one location to another in our essay. Revision means the action of revising, especially critical or careful examination or perusal with a view to correcting or improving.

(1) An appeal lies to a superior court, which may not necessary be a High Court, while a revision application under the code lies only to the High Court.

(2) An appeal lies only from the decrees and appealable order, but a revision application lies from any decision of a court subordinate to the High Court from which no appeal lies to the High Court or to any subordinate court.

(3) A right of appeal is a substantive right conferred by the statute, while the revisional power of the High Court is purely discretionary.

(4) An appeal abates if the legal representatives of a deceased party are not brought on record within the prescribed period. A revision application however does not abate in such case. The High Court may at any time bring the proper parties on the record of the case.

(5) The grounds for an appeal and revision application are also different. An appeal lies on a question of fact or law or of fact and law, while a revision application lies only on the ground of jurisdictional error.

(6) In case of appeal the memorandum of appeal must be filed before the appellate court by the aggrieved party, but filing of an application is not necessary in case of revision.

(7) Ordinarily appellate jurisdiction involves rehearing on question of law as well as on facts of the case whereas revisional jurisdiction involves only the question of law and this jurisdiction is never considered a rehearing.

(8) An appeal is considered to be a consideration of the original proceeding whereas unlike appeal revisional is not the constitution of the original proceeding.

(9) An appeal is a right based remedy and can be claimed as of right if there is statutory existence of it, where the revision is the purely discretionary remedy and cannot be claimed as of right.

The Supreme Court of India, has held, in recent judgment,on OCTOBER 06, 2016.

A Hindu son can divorce his wife for the cruelty of trying to pry him away from his “pious obligation” to live with his aged parents and provide shelter to them.

Insisting her husband to live separately from his parents is a western thought alien to our culture and ethos, observed Justice Anil R.Dave, who wrote the judgment.

The court was confirming the divorce of a Karnataka-based couple in a recent judgment. Married in 1992, the lower court granted the husband divorce after he alleged cruelty on his wife’s part. He quoted instances of her constant suspicions about him having illegal affairs with a maid. It was later found that no such maid as described by the wife ever worked in the couple’s home

In another instance, the apex court found that the wife had attempted to commit suicide but was rescued in the nick of time. She wanted to separate the man from his parents who were dependent on his income.

However, the High Court had set aside the decree of divorce, saying the wife had a “legitimate expectation” to see her husband’s income used for her and not his family members.

Shuddering at the thought of the legal tangles in which the “poor husband” would have found himself caught in had she succeeded in committing suicide, the Supreme Court concluded: “The mere idea with regard to facing legal consequences would put a husband under tremendous stress.”

In India, generally people do not subscribe to the western thought, where, upon getting married or attaining majority, the son gets separated from the family, the court said. In normal circumstances, a wife is expected to be with the family of the husband after the marriage.

“She becomes integral to and forms part of the family of the husband and normally without any justifiable strong reason, she would never insist that her husband should get separated from the family and live only with her,” Justice Dave observed.

“It is not a common practice or desirable culture for a Hindu son in India to get separated from his parents on getting married at the instance of the wife, especially when the son is the only earning member in the family. A son, brought up and given education by his parents, has a moral and legal obligation to take care and maintain the parents, when they become old and when they have either no income or have a meagre income,” Justice Dave wrote.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.3253 OF 2008
NARENDRA … APPELLANT
VERSUS
K. MEENA … RESPONDENT
.J. (ANIL R. DAVE)
J. (L. NAGESWARA RAO)
NEW DELHI
OCTOBER 06, 2016.

Recently there is much uproar regarding triple talaq. A communalist party which also claims to be nationalist, start saying that talaq is discrimination against Muslim women. Muslim women must get equal treatment like Hindu women. In Hindu divorce system, one has to go through court. It is a tedious partial and tiresome process. It takes 20 years or more to get a divorce. In this forum, there are many instances in support of this statement. Hence I don’t prolong the discussion by giving examples. On the contrarily, in the Muslim divorce system, divorce is much quicker.  Is it a discrimination to get a quick divorce in this jet-set life of today?  No, they say. The real problem lies elsewhere.

The Supreme Court has issued an order that triple talaq will not be accepted in this country as a valid means of divorce. Why?  The pundits say that it ignores the rights of Muslim women. In reality, Muslim women are given divorce and are thrown out into the road. Their rights on divorce are neglected. Oh! This is the real problem. But, hey, isn’t there any law protecting Muslim women’s rights? Oh, yes, ofcourse.  The following law takes care of the rights of Muslim women on divorce:

The Muslim women (protection of rights on divorce) act and rules, 1986[act no.25 of 1986].the preamble of the act reads: 

This act protects the rights of Muslim women who have been divorced by or have obtained divorce from, their husband and to provide for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

 

Now how do I come to know about this act? Well, it is in the syllabi of my law school under the heading: Muslim laws. I have studied it in 3rd or 4th SEM. Why then our almighty govt. does not know it?

 

But what about quick and sudden divorce? Muslim women cannot say talaq to men. Really? But there is a law which actually clarify the meaning of sharia law relating to divorce. The law is:

The dissolution of Muslim marriage act, 1939 [act no.8 of 1939]. The preamble reads: an act to consolidate and clarify the provision of Muslim law relating to suits of dissolution of marriage by women married under  Muslim law and to remove doubts as to the effect of the renunciation of Islam by a married Muslim woman on her marriage tie.

Section 2 of the said act gives ample grounds to Muslim women for divorce. Yea, Muslim women can give talaq to their feudal husband according to Islam. Again section 5 of the said act protect their right of dower on divorce. Well then where is the discrimination ?

Again how do I know? I must be very good at legal research. No. again it is in my legal curricula. These curricula is an all India legal curricula followed by all universities of India.

Now pundits may say that in reality these laws are not followed. But who’s responsibility it is then? Isn’t it police’s job to enforce these laws ? will you change the law because law is not enforced properly? No.