(1.) Heard Sri V. K. Nagatch for petitioner and Sri Rahul Sahai for the contesting respondent No. 3.
(2.) By the impugned order dated 19.10.2002, the District Judge, Mathura, has dismissed Civil Revision No. 120 of 2002 between Vishnu Mohan and Mahesh Chandra, on the ground that after the enforcement of C.P.C Amendment, 1999 with effect from 1st July, 2002, the civil revision was not maintainable.
(3.) Counsel for petitioner has placed reliance upon a judgment of this Court dated 9.10.2002 in Transfer Application No. 36 of 2002, between Lallan and District Judge, Jaunpur and Ors., by which it has been held that revisions under Section 115, C.P.C., which were instituted before the District Judges prior to 1.7.2002 can be heard and disposed of by the District Judges, and that the jurisdiction to decide these revisions has not been taken away. This Court relied upon the judgments of Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore v. Smt. Shardamma, JT 1996 (4) SC 90, in which it was held that if the amendments are made changing the forum regarding appeal or revision, duly instituted pending cases shall be decided by the forum in which they were instituted unless an intention to the contrary is clearly shown. In Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises (P.) Ltd. v. Amrit Lal and Company, 2001 (8) SCC 397 and Central Bank of India v. VIth Additional District Judge, Kanpur Nagar, 1997 (2) AWC 711 : 1997 (1) ARC 312, the same view was taken that duly instituted matters shall be decided by the same Court, notwithstanding the change in the forum.