JASWINDER PAL Vs. VIKAS KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE impugned order is an adjudication of the objections of a third party and will be deemed to be an order under order 21 Rule 103 CPC.

(2.) THE revision petition can be dismissed, following the Full Bench judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Gurram Seetharam Reddy Vs. Smt. Gunti Yashoda and another, 2005 AIR(AP) 95, wherein it has been laid down that orders passed under Order 21 Rules, 58, 98 or 100 CPC are appealable under Section 96 CPC. In M/s Sunil Auto Service Vs. Parikshant Suri and others, 2011 1 RCR(Rent) 452, it is held that the an appeal lies against the impugned order. Similar is the ratio of the judgment in Jagroop Singh Vs. Boria Khan, 2002 4 RCR(Civ) 336, wherein it has been held that where an application has been adjudicated upon under Order 21 Rule 98 or Rule 100 CPC, such an order of adjudication have the force of a decree appealable under Rule 103. It was held in the said judgment that revision is not maintainable against an appealable order.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on judgment in Sameer Singh and another Vs. Abdul Rab and others, 2014 4 RCR(Civ) 914 contending that the Apex Court has held that in case of erroneous exercise of jurisdiction by a subordinate Court, while deciding objections under Order 21 Rule 98 to Rule 103 CPC, determining the right, title or interest of the objector in immoveable property, the Court has got authority to adjudicate all the questions including the claim of a stranger who apprehends dispossession.