ORDER :

These Civil Revision Petitions arising out of orders passed in two execution applications in an execution petition filed by first respondents in both petitions in E.P.No.18 of 2008 in O.S.No.14 of 2008 dated 09.07.2015 on the file of 1st Additional District Judge, Machilipatnam, Krishna District, can be disposed of by common order wherein and whereby claim petitions filed by first respondents in the civil revision petitions under Section 47 read with Order XXI Rules 97, 98, 101 and Section 151 CPC allowed by the Court below.

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for respondents would submit that revision petition is not maintainable against the orders passed by the Court below in a petition filed under Section 47 read with Order XXI Rules 97, 98, 101 and Section 151 CPC in view of ratio laid down by Full Bench of this Court in Gurram Seetharam Reddy Vs. Gunti Yashoda, 2004(6) ALD 175 (FB). For which, learned Senior Counsel for revision petitioners submitted that the revision petitions can be converted as first appeals, which also permissible under law. This Court proceeded to hear both sides on the point that whether revision petition can be converted into first appeal?

3. The learned Senior Counsel for revision petitioners would submit that grounds on which first appeal has to be filed are similar to the grounds which they mentioned in the revision petition and it is permissible under law to convert civil revision petition into first appeal. He relied on following precedent law:

(1) Om Prakash and Others – Appellants Vs. Dwarka Prasad and Others - Respondents, MANU/MP/0442/2004 = AIR 2005 MP 40 wherein it is held that revision could be converted into appeal suit if substantial question of law exists and if the same is filed within prescribed time limit.

(2) Narendra Kumar Mehta – Appellant Vs. Smt.Suraj Mehta -Respondent, AIR 1982 AP 100 wherein it is held that when there is no provision for filing appeals, High Court may exercise its revisionary jurisdiction under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code and treat the appeals as revisions.

(3) The Reliable Water Supply Service of India - Appellants Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Others - Respondents, AIR 1971 SC 2083 wherein Hon’ble

Apex Court observed that High Court was right in converting the appeal into a revision.

(4) Bahori – Applicant Vs. Vidya Ra – Opposite Party, AIR 1978 ALLAHABAD 299 wherein it is held that there is no specific provision for conversion of an appeal into a revision as vice versa. Consequently, the exercise of power has to be only under the provisions of Section 151 of CPC. The inherent powers of the Court permit the Court to make such orders as may be necessary to meet the ends of justice. The power is undoubtedly discretionary and is to be exercised in a proper case. If the interest of justice requires the passing of such an order or to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court, the Court is fully justified in passing of an order under this provision.

4. The learned counsel for the respondents would submit that there is specific provision for filing appeals before the Court under Section 96 and Order XLI of Civil Procedure Code, due to that when civil revision petition is filed, it is not permissible to convert the same into first appeal and it has to be looked into whether it is filed within time. He relied on following decisions:

(1) Order of this Court in C.R.P.No.21297 of 2017, wherein this Court after accepting the representation of revision petitioner therein and also after considering Order 43 Rule 1(ja) of Civil Procedure Code permitted to file Civil Miscellaneous Appeal by giving benefit under Section 14 of Limitation Act, but not converted civil revision petition into first appeal.

(2) M/s.Lakshmiratan Engineering Works Ltd – Appellant Vs. Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) I, Sales Tax, Kanpur Range, Kanpur and another - Respondents, AIR 1968 Supreme Court 488 wherein Hon’ble Apex Court while discussing precedent law held