Advocates:
A.V.VISHWANATHA SASTRI, BAKSHI SHIV CHARAN SINGH, D.P.Singh, M.K.RAMAMURTHY, N.C.CHATTERJI, R.K.GARG, S.C.AGRAWAL, S.N.ANAND

Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points related to the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code:

1. The revisional jurisdiction of the High Court is discretionary and is invoked only when a subordinate court's decision involves a jurisdictional error or irregularity, or acts illegally (!) (!) .

2. The section concerns jurisdiction alone, and the High Court's power is limited to correcting decisions where there is a clear excess, failure, or illegality of jurisdiction, not errors of law or fact in the decision itself (!) (!) .

3. The term "case" in Section 115 is comprehensive and includes proceedings other than suits, and it encompasses interlocutory orders relating to rights and obligations, not just final decisions (!) (!) .

4. The scope of "no appeal lies thereto" is broad, covering decisions that are not final or where no appeal is available, including interlocutory orders that involve jurisdictional issues (!) (!) .

5. The power under Section 115 is akin to issuing a writ of certiorari—used to quash orders or decisions that are made without jurisdiction or with material irregularity, but not for correcting errors of law or fact where jurisdiction is proper (!) (!) .

6. The High Court can exercise revisional jurisdiction at any stage of the proceeding, even if another remedy (such as appeal) exists, provided the decision involves jurisdictional error or irregularity (!) (!) .

7. The decision of a subordinate court that erroneously denies jurisdiction or acts with material irregularity is a "case" that can be revisited under Section 115, regardless of whether a final decree or order has been passed (!) (!) .

8. The language "in which no appeal lies thereto" should be interpreted broadly, including decisions on interlocutory issues that affect jurisdiction, not only final judgments or decrees (!) (!) .

9. The exercise of revisional jurisdiction is discretionary and should be exercised in the interest of justice, especially where the decision affects rights directly or involves jurisdictional irregularities (!) (!) .

10. The section does not extend to the power of issuing prerogative writs such as prohibition or mandamus, but is specifically concerned with jurisdictional errors and irregularities in decisions of subordinate courts (!) (!) .

11. The order or decision must be such that it terminates or substantially affects the rights of the parties, and irregularities or lack of jurisdiction in such decisions are proper grounds for revision (!) (!) .

12. The High Court's revisional jurisdiction aims to ensure that subordinate courts operate within their lawful jurisdiction and do not act illegally or with material irregularity, rather than to correct errors of law or fact in the decision (!) (!) .

Please let me know if you need further elaboration or specific legal advice based on these principles.