Revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 CPC does not defeat a mandatory referral to arbitration under a valid clause.

Section 115 CPC confers revisional jurisdiction only for jurisdictional error, failure to exercise jurisdiction, or material irregularity, and it does not permit correction of every alleged factual or legal error. Where the dispute arose from an account opening form containing an arbitration clause and the trial court found the grievance against the stock broker fell within that agreement, Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 operated mandatorily. Objections to arbitrability, the existence of the arbitration agreement, or the tribunal's competence had to be raised before the arbitral tribunal in the first instance. The revision petition was therefore not maintainable, and the referral to arbitration was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner's challenge under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to the trial court's order referring the dispute to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was maintainable.

Analysis: The scope of revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is confined to jurisdictional errors, failure to exercise jurisdiction, or exercise of jurisdiction with material irregularity. It does not permit correction of every alleged error of fact or law. The dispute arose from an account opening form containing an arbitration clause, and the trial court had already found that the petitioner's substantive grievance was against the stock broker and fell within the arbitration agreement. In such circumstances, Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 operates mandatorily, and objections regarding arbitrability, the existence of an arbitration agreement, or the competence of the arbitral tribunal are to be raised before the tribunal in the first instance.

Conclusion: The revision petition was not maintainable and the trial court's order referring the parties to arbitration was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a civil court correctly refers parties to arbitration under a valid arbitration clause, a revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 does not lie unless the order discloses a jurisdictional defect or material irregularity.

---