Revision under the Code remains maintainable against a civil court order in arbitration appeal proceedings, the Supreme Court held.

Where an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is heard by a civil court without express or implied exclusion of the Code of Civil Procedure, the ordinary procedural incidents of that court continue to apply. The statutory bar in section 37(3) was confined to a second appeal and did not exclude revisional jurisdiction under section 115. The Supreme Court therefore held that a revision petition was maintainable before the High Court and declined to entertain the challenge as the first forum.

---

---

Issues: Whether a revision petition under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 lies to the High Court against an order of a civil court passed in an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and whether the Supreme Court should entertain the appeal directly instead of directing resort to the High Court.

Analysis: The appeal under section 37 lies to a civil court and the Act does not expressly exclude the application of the Code of Civil Procedure to proceedings before that court. The statutory bar in section 37(3) is confined to a second appeal and does not, by itself, extinguish revisional jurisdiction under section 115. In the absence of express or necessary implied exclusion, the ordinary procedural incidents of a civil court attach, including the supervisory revisional power of the High Court. The Court also held that the availability of revision is not displaced by the general bar in section 5, since the proceedings are before a civil court and not before a forum insulated from the Code. The plea of urgency and sensitivity did not justify bypassing the High Court, particularly when the parties had already approached it earlier.

Conclusion: A revision under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is maintainable against the appellate order passed by the civil court under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the appellant must first pursue that remedy before the High Court.

Final Conclusion: The Supreme Court declined to entertain the matter as the first forum of challenge and held that the High Court remained competent to examine the revision petition.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a special statute confers appellate jurisdiction on an established civil court without expressly or impliedly excluding the Code of Civil Procedure, the ordinary procedural incidents of that court, including revisional jurisdiction of the High Court, continue to apply, subject only to the specific statutory bar enacted by the special law.

---