B.KESAV RAO Vs. P.SIVANNARAYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is the defendant in O.S. No. 348/2011 on the file of the Court of the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The suit is filed by the respondent herein for recovery of money allegedly due from the defendant/revision petitioner. The defendant filed his written statement contesting the suit claim. Thereafter the plaintiff filed I.A. No. 451/2013 under Order XII Rule 6 of C.P.C. contending that there was a clear admission in the written statement to the extent of Rs. 45 lakhs out of the suit claim and accordingly praying the Court to grant a decree to the extent of the admitted amount of Rs. 45 lakhs. Though the defendant opposed the said application contending that there was no clear admission as sought to be contended by the plaintiff, the Court below negatived the said contention and by order dated 05.07.2013 allowed I.A. No. 451/2013 holding that there are valid and sufficient grounds to give a judgment having regard to the admissions made in the written statement. Accordingly a decree in part was granted against the defendant and in favour of the plaintiff for a sum of Rs. 45 lakhs. Aggrieved by the said order dated 05.07.2013 the present revision petition is filed by the defendant under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. When the matter is taken up for admission, the learned counsel for the respondent at the outset raised an objection as to the very maintainability of the revision petition contending that the order under revision which conclusively determines the rights of the parties is a decree within the meaning of Section 2(2) of C.P.C. and therefore only an appeal lies under Section 96 of C.P.C.

(2.) On the other hand it is contended by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that the jurisdiction vested in this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being a revisional jurisdiction, the same can be invoked by the aggrieved party for correction of the errors committed by the subordinate courts.

(3.) The question whether a revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India can be maintained against a judgment and decree passed on the basis of admissions made by the defendant is no longer res Integra.