Difficulty: Easy
Correct Answer: The authority of a higher court to review and hear appeals from decisions of lower courts.
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:
Courts can have different kinds of jurisdiction, such as original, appellate, territorial and subject matter jurisdiction. Understanding these terms is essential for students of law, public administration and political science. This question focuses on the meaning of appellate jurisdiction, a concept that appears frequently in discussions of Supreme Courts and High Courts, both in India and in other countries. Knowing what appellate jurisdiction means helps you understand how higher courts supervise and correct errors made by lower courts.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:
The word appellate comes from the idea of an appeal. When a party is unhappy with the decision of a lower court, it may appeal to a higher court. The power of that higher court to hear such appeals, to review the record and to affirm, modify or reverse the lower court decision is called appellate jurisdiction. This is different from original jurisdiction, where a court hears a case first, and from powers that belong to legislatures or executive agencies. Therefore, the correct option must clearly state that appellate jurisdiction is the authority of a higher court to hear appeals from lower courts.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Focus on the root word appeal in appellate, which suggests that it deals with appeals.
Step 2: Recall that appeals move upwards from a lower court to a higher court, such as from a trial court to a High Court or Supreme Court.
Step 3: Examine option B, which states that appellate jurisdiction is the authority of a higher court to review and hear appeals from decisions of lower courts. This matches the concept exactly.
Step 4: Option A describes original jurisdiction, where a court hears a case for the first time, not appellate jurisdiction.
Step 5: Option C refers to legislative power to make laws, which is not a type of court jurisdiction.
Step 6: Option D speaks about enforcement of decisions, which is an executive function rather than a judicial jurisdiction.
Step 7: Since only option B correctly captures the idea of appeals, it is the correct answer.
Verification / Alternative check:
You can verify your choice by recalling how the Supreme Court or a High Court often hears appeals from lower courts. News reports may say that a person has appealed to the Supreme Court after losing in a High Court. Textbooks explain that in such cases the Supreme Court is exercising its appellate jurisdiction. When a court is said to have no appellate jurisdiction in a matter, it means it cannot hear appeals and can only deal with cases in its original jurisdiction. This consistent usage confirms that appellate jurisdiction is about reviewing lower court decisions, which matches option B.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option A is wrong because it defines original jurisdiction, which is about hearing cases for the first time, not on appeal.
Option C is wrong because making and changing laws is the function of a legislature, such as Parliament or a state assembly, not a type of court jurisdiction.
Option D is wrong because enforcing court decisions is an executive task carried out by police and administrative agencies, not a description of court jurisdiction.
Common Pitfalls:
A common mistake is to confuse appellate and original jurisdiction, especially when both types of jurisdiction exist within the same higher court. Another pitfall is to treat any power of a higher court as appellate jurisdiction, even when the court is actually exercising original jurisdiction in special types of cases. Students should remember the simple rule that appellate jurisdiction always involves an appeal from a lower court decision, while original jurisdiction does not. Keeping the link between appeals and appellate jurisdiction clear in your mind will help you answer many questions on judicial powers accurately.
Final Answer:
The authority of a higher court to review and hear appeals from decisions of lower courts.
Discussion & Comments