HOTURAM TEJBHAN Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) BY means of this writ petition, the Petitioners have challenged the order dated 10 -10 -2007, passed by learned District Judge, Haridwar, in civil revision No. 85 of 2007, whereby revision against the order dated 16 -09 -2007, passed in execution case No. 04 of 2000, by Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Haridwar (Executing Court) is entertained. By order dated 16 -09 -2007, the executing court rejected the application 54A (wrongly mentioned as 44A, seeking amendment in the execution application), moved by Respondent No. 3.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner argued that neither the order passed by executing court suffers from any jurisdictional error nor is there any illegality, which requires interference by the revisional court. He further argued that the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Judge is to entertain revision only of valuation to the tune of Rs. 5,00,000/ - and no more. While the execution sought relates to recovery of Rs. 9,10,433/ -.