JUDGMENT

KRISHNA IYER. J. :— These petitions for special leave deserve to be dismissed because the Full Bench judgment of the Allahabad High Court which is challenged in all the three has been rightly decided in our view. Even so, a speaking order has become necessary because, as rightly pointed out by counsel, the earlier decision of this court in Vishesh Kumar v. Shanti Prasad, AIR 1980 SC 892 does not specifically cover the precise point that has been raised before us by counsel for the petitioner. We are concerned with the ambit and impact of S. 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Uttar Pradesh Amendment) Act, 1978 (for short, the Act), which forbids a revision under S. 115 of the Civil Procedure Code (acronymically, the C. P. C.) to the High Court from a judgment or order in appeal by the District Court where the suit out of which the case arises is not one of the value of Rs. 20,000 and above.

2. We have, in Vishesh Kumar v. Shanti Prasad, AIR 1980 SC 892 (supra) considered the scheme, setting and purpose of the U. P. Amendment to the Civil Procedure Code bearing on the revisory power of the High Court under S. 115, C. P. C. We may quote:

A schematic analysis of the judicial hier