BAHORI Vs. VIDYA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE District Judge, Budaun dismissed a revision as not maintainable on the ground that an appeal lay. THE District Judge further held that the prayer for the conversion of the revision into an appeal could not be granted as the prayer was made after the period of filing the appeal had expired.

(2.) IT was urged on behalf of the revisionist that the view taken by the learned District Judge was manifestly erroneous as the Court had power to order the conversion of a revision into an appeal where the revision was filed within the time provided for the filing of an appeal. IT was further urged that since the District Judge was also competent to hear the appeal against the order of the learned Munsif he should have treated the revision as an appeal and heard it on merits. The failure on his part to do so has resulted in an erroneous exercise of jurisdiction.

(3.) THE question, therefore to be considered is whether an order of conversion could be passed after the date of filing of the appeal had expired. I see no impediment in the Court' s power to do so. After all, both appeal and revision come under the appellate jurisdiction of the Court. THE scope and ambit of exercise of power under an appeal is wider and that under a revision is not so wide. But then if either an appeal or a revision is allowed the order sought to be appealed or revised is set aside. THE result then in either case is the same i.e. the order is set aside.