K B RAJU Vs. SAKTHIVELAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"), challenging the concurrent Judgment and Decree in A.S.No.86 of 2003 of the learned Principal District Judge, Vellore, confirming the Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.390 of 2001 of the learned Additional District Munsif, Vellore.

(2.) This revision has been filed by the petitioner, in view of the bar under Section 102 of the Code to the filing of a Second Appeal against any decree, when the subject matter of the Original Suit is for recovery of money not exceeding Rs.5,000/-.

(3.) The instant case squarely falls within the prohibition and it is for this reason that the petitioner has invoked Section 115 of the Code. However, in the light of the Judgment (K. Chockalingam v. K.R. Ramasamy Iyer and others, 2004 4 LW 586), wherein this Court has clearly held that the invocation of Section 115 of the Code, where the subject matter is less than Rs.25,000/-, would in all respects amount to a Second Appeal in the garb of a Civil Revision Petition, the present revision filed under Section 115 of the Code is not maintainable. However, this Judgment has been followed in (Manickam Moopanar v. Lakshmi and others,2012 3 MWN(CIV) 875) and this Court has held that the remedy for an aggrieved party on account of the bar under Section 102 of the Code is to file a revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The Court exercising it powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India had then proceeded to convert the Second Appeal into a revision filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.