FAUJDAR Vs. PRABANDH SAMIT BHARTIYA UCHATTAR MADHYAMIK VIDYALAYAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal, which is directed against the Order of Ist Addl. District Judge, Gorakhpur in a Civil Revision arises out of a suit in which certain preliminary issues were raised and were disposed of by the Trial Court in favour of plaintiff, including the question that the plaint was liable to be rejected under O. VII, R. 11, C. P. C. Being unsuccessful in the Trial Court the defendant filed a revision which was allowed by order under appeal. The Court of Revision disagreed with the findings of the Trial Court and held that the plaint was liable to be rejected under O. VII, R. 11, C. P. C. Against this order passed in the revision, the present appeal has been filed.

(2.) THERE can be no dispute, that under the definition of the term decree in Section 2 (2) of the C. P. C. an order rejecting the plaint under O. VII, R. 11, C. P. C. amounts to a decree. However, a second appeal u/s. 100 would lie to the High Court 'from a decree passed in appeal' by any Court subordinate to the High Court. The question that crops up for decision here is whether an order passed in revision could be said to be "a decree passed in appeal" within the meaning of S. 100, C. P. C.

(3.) THIS case is however distinguishable. In U. P. there is a local amendment in S. 115 of the Code under which in cases having a valuation of less than Rs. 20. 000/- the revision lies to the District Judge, who exercises the same powers as the High Court in that matter. Apart from this what the Supreme Court had said in the case was that the jurisdiction exercised u/s. 115 of the Code was part of general appellate jurisdiction of the High Court. However, even if that be so, u/s. 115, C. P. C. the Court merely passes an order and not a decree. An order passed in exercise of revisional jurisdiction therefore, cannot be said to be a "decree in appeal". Passing a decree in an appeal is one thing but it is quite another thing to say that while deciding a revision the Court exercises jurisdiction which is part of the general appellate jurisdiction of the Court. Nature of jurisdiction which the revisional Court exercises may certainly be that of Appellate Court but it is only a fraction of its overall appellate authority and the nature of the order is entirely different which cannot be termed as a decree.