A Small Causes Court decree is challengeable by revision under Section 25, not appeal.

The respondent challenged a judgment and decree dated 30 November 2022 of the Additional Judge, Small Causes Court, Vadodara, in SMST-R No. 225 of 2020, by filing Regular Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2023.

The 10th Additional District Judge, Vadodara, decided that appeal on 5 August 2025.

In the appellant’s second appeal, the High Court framed substantial questions of law, including one concerning the appellate court’s jurisdiction.

The respondent accepted that the challenge to the Small Causes Court’s decree should have been brought by revision, not appeal, and sought permission to withdraw the regular appeal and pursue that remedy.

Whether an appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure lay against the Small Causes Court’s judgment and decree, or whether the respondent’s remedy was revision before the High Court under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, 1887.

Whether the respondent could withdraw the regular appeal, with liberty to pursue revision and seek exclusion of time spent in the wrong forum under Section 14 of the Limitation Act.

Under the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, 1887, no appeal under Section 96 CPC lay against the Small Causes Court’s judgment and decree in this matter; the available challenge was a revision before the High Court under Section 25 of the Act.

Where a litigant has pursued a remedy in a wrong forum, the time spent there may be considered under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, subject to the requirements of that provision and consideration in the appropriate proceedings.

The parties did not dispute that the respondent had used the wrong procedural route: the Small Causes Court decree was not appealable under Section 96 CPC, and the proper remedy was revision under Section 25 of the 1887 Act.

The High Court therefore held that the appellate court’s judgment was without jurisdiction.

It permitted withdrawal of the regular appeal and set aside that judgment, while reserving liberty to file a revision.

It also stated that the time spent before the appellate court and in the second appeal was to be treated as time spent in the wrong forum, leaving the respondent to seek the benefit of Section 14 in the revision and any delay application.

The merits of the underlying dispute were not decided.

Regular Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2023 was withdrawn, and the appellate judgment and decree dated 5 August 2025 were set aside as having been passed without jurisdiction.

The respondent was granted liberty to file a revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, 1887, and may seek the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act; the merits were left open for any such revision.

The civil application to vacate interim relief was disposed of as no longer surviving.