( 1 ) BY this revision, petitioner-Bank has assailed the order passed below Ex. 56 by the learned Civil Judge (S. D.) at Porbandar on 22-4- 1985 in Regular Civil Suit No. 27 of 1983. Thus, the petitioners have invoked the provisions of Sec. 115 of the Civil Procedure Code ("code" for short hereinafter ).

( 2 ) LEARNED Advocate Shri K. M. Patel appeared for the petitioners while learned Advocate Shri D. G. Karia appeared for the opponent in this revision.

( 3 ) LEARNED Advocate Shri Patel, for the petitioners, has vehemently contended that the impugned order is totally invalid and illegal. His contention is repelled by the learned Advocate Shri Karia for the opponnt.

( 4 ) IN fact the question which has arisen in this revision is very short, but very interesting. The short question is, whether the impugned order passed below Ex. 56 is legal and valid or not. In order to appreciate the merits of this short question, it would be necessary to set out a few relevant and material facts leading to the rise of the present revision.

( 5 ) THE present opponent filed the above suit against the present petitioner-Union Bank of India. The parties are hereinafter addressed to as "plain