Memorandum of civil appeal and civil revision petition

Drafting, Pleading and Conveyance · Unit II · Topic 9 of 19 · 7 min read

First and second appeals under sections 96 and 100 CPC, the form and grounds of a memorandum under Order XLI, deposit and stay, limitation, the limited scope of revision under section 115, and model drafts of a first appeal and a revision petition.

← All Drafting, Pleading and Conveyance topics

On this page

1. Which remedy
2. The memorandum of first appeal: Order XLI
3. How to write grounds
4. Model: memorandum of regular first appeal
5. Civil revision under section 115
How this is examined

Cases checked to exist. Read the judgment before quoting a holding.

Every case cited here has been checked to exist — the citation resolves and names the right parties. The propositions attributed to each case have not been verified line by line against the judgment. Case names link through to the full judgment: read it before quoting a holding in an examination answer, and never carry a proposition from notes into court on trust.

Grounds, not narrative. Order XLI Rule 1(2) requires a memorandum of appeal to set out, concisely and under distinct heads, the grounds of objection to the decree, without any argument or narrative, numbered consecutively. A memorandum that retells the story of the suit is badly drafted; one that lists precise errors in the judgment is well drafted.

1. Which remedy

First appeal (section 96) lies from every original decree, on facts and law, to the court authorised to hear appeals (the District Court or the High Court, depending on value). No appeal lies from a decree passed with the consent of parties (section 96(3)).
Second appeal (section 100) lies to the High Court from an appellate decree only if the case involves a substantial question of law, which the memorandum must precisely state.
Appeal from orders (section 104 and Order XLIII Rule 1): only the orders listed, such as an order on a temporary injunction (Rule 1(r)) or rejecting an application to set aside an ex parte decree (Rule 1(d)).
Revision (section 115) where no appeal lies.
Review (section 114 and Order XLVII) to the same court, on discovery of new evidence, an error apparent on the face of the record or other sufficient reason.

2. The memorandum of first appeal: Order XLI

Rule 1(1): in the form of a memorandum signed by the appellant or his pleader, accompanied by a copy of the judgment. (Where a certified copy of the decree is also required by the High Court’s rules or practice, file it.)
Rule 1(2): grounds, concise, distinct, numbered, no argument.
Rule 1(3): in an appeal against a money decree, the appellant must deposit the disputed amount or furnish security within the time the court allows.
Rule 2: the appellant cannot urge a ground not in the memorandum without leave, so draft every ground now.
Rule 3: a memorandum not in proper form may be rejected or returned for amendment.
Rule 3A: an appeal filed late must be accompanied by an application for condonation of delay with an affidavit.
Rule 5: an appeal is not a stay. A separate application for stay must show substantial loss, be made without unreasonable delay, and offer security.

Limitation (Article 116, Limitation Act, 1963): 90 days from the decree for an appeal to a High Court; 30 days for an appeal to any other court. Section 12 excludes the day of the decree and the time taken to obtain a copy.

3. How to write grounds

Open with the general ground: the judgment and decree are contrary to law, facts and the evidence on record.
Then specific errors, each in one paragraph, naming the issue, the evidence and the error: wrong placing of burden of proof, a material document ignored, an admission misread, a finding without evidence, a wrong reading of a statutory provision.
Errors of law separately from errors of fact.
For a second appeal, separate substantial questions of law framed as questions.
Close with the relief: set aside the judgment and decree, decree or dismiss the suit, costs throughout.

4. Model: memorandum of regular first appeal

Illustrative template, hypothetical facts (the defendant appeals against the decree in the model money suit).

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD R.A. No. ____ of 2027

Sri Mahesh S. Kulkarni … Appellant (Defendant) v. Sri Anil V. Desai … Respondent (Plaintiff)

MEMORANDUM OF REGULAR APPEAL UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH ORDER XLI RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, against the judgment and decree dated 15 June 2027 in O.S. No. 512 of 2026 on the file of the ____ Civil Judge, Dharwad.

The appellant submits the following among other grounds:

The judgment and decree of the trial court are contrary to law, facts and the evidence on record.
The trial court erred in holding that Rs. 4,00,000 was paid as a loan when the plaintiff produced no writing evidencing a loan and admitted in cross-examination (PW-1, page 6) that the defendant renovated his shop in 2025.
The trial court failed to consider Ex. D-3, the full WhatsApp message of 12 March 2026, which refers to “the balance of the shop work” and does not mention any loan.
The trial court wrongly placed on the defendant the burden of proving that the payment was an advance, when it was for the plaintiff to prove the loan he pleaded.
The trial court erred in dismissing the counter-claim without framing an issue on it, in breach of Order XIV Rule 1.
The award of interest at 9 per cent before suit is without any proof of an agreement to pay interest.

Valuation: the appeal is valued at Rs. 4,67,956 and court fee is paid. Limitation: the decree is dated 15 June 2027; the appeal is filed within 30 days excluding the time taken for copies.

Prayer: set aside the judgment and decree dated 15 June 2027 in O.S. No. 512 of 2026, dismiss the suit, decree the counter-claim, and award costs throughout.

Place: Dharwad. Date: ____. Sd/- Advocate for Appellant.

Filed with: certified copy of judgment and decree; I.A. under Order XLI Rule 5 for stay of execution offering security; deposit under Order XLI Rule 1(3) as directed.

5. Civil revision under section 115

The High Court may call for the record of a case decided by a subordinate court in which no appeal lies, if that court (a) exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it, (b) failed to exercise a jurisdiction vested in it, or (c) acted illegally or with material irregularity in exercising it. The proviso, inserted in 1999, bars interference with an interlocutory order unless the order, had it been made in the revision petitioner’s favour, would have finally disposed of the suit. Section 115(2) bars revision where an appeal lies, and section 115(3) says revision is not a stay. The limitation under Article 131 is 90 days.

Illustrative template: civil revision petition, hypothetical facts.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH C.R.P. No. ____ of 2027

Sri Basavaraj M. Angadi … Petitioner (Defendant) v. Sri Nagaraj H. Patil … Respondent (Plaintiff)

CIVIL REVISION PETITION UNDER SECTION 115 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, against the order dated 4 March 2027 on I.A. No. 4 in O.S. No. 77 of 2025 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Haveri, dismissing the defendant’s application under Order VII Rule 11(d).

The respondent sued in September 2025 for recovery of money lent on 1 June 2022. The plaint itself states that the loan was payable on demand and pleads no acknowledgment or part payment.
The petitioner applied under Order VII Rule 11(d) to reject the plaint as barred by Article 21 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The trial court dismissed the application, saying limitation is a mixed question of fact and law to be decided at trial.
Maintainability. No appeal lies against the order. Had the application been allowed, the plaint would have been rejected and the suit finally disposed of, so the proviso to section 115(1) does not bar this revision.
Ground. The trial court failed to exercise a jurisdiction vested in it. Under Rule 11(d) the court must look only at the averments in the plaint; on those averments the three-year period expired on 1 June 2025, and no ground of exemption is pleaded as Order VII Rule 6 requires.
The order therefore suffers from material irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction within section 115(1)(c).

Prayer: call for the records, set aside the order dated 4 March 2027, allow I.A. No. 4 and reject the plaint; stay further proceedings in O.S. No. 77 of 2025 pending this petition. Sd/- Advocate for Petitioner.

Trap. The opposite order, one that allows a Rule 11 application and rejects the plaint, is a deemed decree under section 2(2) and is appealable. Against that order the plaintiff must file a first appeal; a revision would be barred by section 115(2). Check which way the order went before choosing the remedy.

How this is examined

The syllabus lists “memorandum of appeal and revision”, so the record needs a first appeal and a revision petition (3 marks each); a second appeal with substantial questions of law is a good extra exercise. At the viva: the difference between appeal and revision; what Order XLI Rule 1(2) requires; limitation for appeals and revisions; the proviso to section 115; and why an appeal does not operate as a stay.