1. Heard Mr. Keshav Srivastava and Mr. Shashi Shekhar Dwivedi, learned senior counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner was the obstructor to execution of a decree and had filed Misc. Case No. 18/03 in terms of Order 21, Rule 97 CPC in the Execution Case No. 2/1989 pending before the learned Sub-Judge 1, Madhubani. The same was held to be not maintainable.

3. Being aggrieved by the said decision the present revision application has been filed.

4. Mr. Dwivedi learned senior counsel appearing for the decree holder-opposite party raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the civil revision application. He submitted that in terms of Order 21, Rule 103 CPC an order passed in such a proceeding is deemed to be a decree and if that be so it is appealable. If an appeal against such an order then in terms of Section 115(2) CPC the order is not amenable to revisional jurisdiction.

5. On behalf of the petitioner Mr. Keshav Srivastava, learned senior counsel submitted that for an order to be a deemed decree in terms of Rule 103 of Order 21, it must be an order passed after adjudication as provided therein. He submitted that when a decree is to be executed and in cours