https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165205 Section 115 CPC confines revisional interference to jurisdictional error, failure to exercise jurisdiction, or illegal exercise with material irregularity. A mere error of law, even in construing a decree, is not revisable unless it affects jurisdiction. The District Court's interpretation of the decree and its finding that the mortgagors' equity of redemption had been extinguished concerned the merits of the adjudication, not the court's jurisdiction. The Supreme Court therefore held that the High Court exceeded its revisional jurisdiction by reversing that finding on a different view of the decree. en-us Mon, 26 Apr 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Aug 2014 08:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165205 Section 115 CPC confines revisional interference to jurisdictional error, failure to exercise jurisdiction, or illegal exercise with material irregularity. A mere error of law, even in construing a decree, is not revisable unless it affects jurisdiction. The District Court's interpretation of the decree and its finding that the mortgagors' equity of redemption had been extinguished concerned the merits of the adjudication, not the court's jurisdiction. The Supreme Court therefore held that the High Court exceeded its revisional jurisdiction by reversing that finding on a different view of the decree. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 26 Apr 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165205