https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313630 The appeals were dismissed, affirming the High Courts' rulings that revision applications were non-maintainable under the amended Section 115 of the CPC, 1908. The SC underscored the procedural nature of the amendments, distinguishing between substantive and procedural rights, and emphasized the legislative intent and statutory interpretation principles. The court clarified that procedural amendments do not affect vested rights, and no specific liberty is needed to seek remedies under Article 227. The decision reinforced the limited scope of judicial review concerning legislative omissions and upheld the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Courts over subordinate courts. en-us Thu, 17 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Apr 2024 14:51:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313630 The appeals were dismissed, affirming the High Courts' rulings that revision applications were non-maintainable under the amended Section 115 of the CPC, 1908. The SC underscored the procedural nature of the amendments, distinguishing between substantive and procedural rights, and emphasized the legislative intent and statutory interpretation principles. The court clarified that procedural amendments do not affect vested rights, and no specific liberty is needed to seek remedies under Article 227. The decision reinforced the limited scope of judicial review concerning legislative omissions and upheld the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Courts over subordinate courts. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 17 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313630