RAM SWARUP CHAUDHARY Vs. MAUJELAL RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff -petitioner filed a suit for a money decree for Rs. 5440/ - against the defendant -opposite party on the allegation that the plaintiff had advanced a sum of Rs. 4000/ - to the defendant in 1973 on the basis of a promissory note. The trial court has accepted the plaintiff" case, but dismissed the suit on the ground of non -compliance of the provisions of Sec. 7(5) of the Bihar Money Lenders Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The petitioner has filed this revision application on the ground that the provisions of the Act are not applicable to the present case as the Act was not in operation when the loan was advanced. After the suit was dismissed in the trial court, the plaintiff ought to have filed an appeal before the District Judge which he has not done. The question, therefore, arises as to whether this civil revision application is maintainable.

(2.) Mr. Ram Janam Mahraj, appearing in support of the application, contended that since the appeal did not lie against the impugned judgment before this Court, it is open to this Court to exercise revisional jurisdiction in appropriate cases. The learned counsel also relied on certain decisions which interpreted the Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure before the amendment of 1976 adding sub -section (2) which reads as follows: - -

(3.) In the result, this revision application is held to be not maintainable and is dismissed. If so advised, the petitioner may file an appeal before the District Judge with a prayer for condonation of delay.