https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166629 The Supreme Court held that interference under Articles 226 and 227 could be justified despite the dismissal of a revision petition under Section 115 of the CPC. The Court emphasized the distinction between appellate and revisional jurisdiction, stating that the revisional jurisdiction is part of the general appellate jurisdiction of the High Court. The Court highlighted the principle of merger of orders and the importance of respecting finality to prevent abuse of process. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgment of the division bench of the High Court and awarding costs to the appellant. en-us Wed, 16 Apr 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 02 Nov 2014 19:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166629 The Supreme Court held that interference under Articles 226 and 227 could be justified despite the dismissal of a revision petition under Section 115 of the CPC. The Court emphasized the distinction between appellate and revisional jurisdiction, stating that the revisional jurisdiction is part of the general appellate jurisdiction of the High Court. The Court highlighted the principle of merger of orders and the importance of respecting finality to prevent abuse of process. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgment of the division bench of the High Court and awarding costs to the appellant. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 16 Apr 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166629