J.B. Pardiwala, J.—As a pure question of law falls for our determination in both the captioned Appeals, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

2. The question of law that falls for our determination is as to having regard to the nature of the proceedings and the nature of the order passed by learned Single Judge whether Letters Patent Appeal would be maintainable against the said judgment and order passed by a learned Single Judge, in view of the recent pronouncement of a Division Bench of this High Court in the case of Gustadji Dhanjisha Buhariwala and another vs. Nevil Bamansha Buhariwala and others, reported in 2011(2) GLH 147, wherein the Division Bench has taken a view that when a remedy for filing a revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is expressly barred, a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India would lie and not a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. If a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is rejected, then no appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent is maintainable.

Facts of Letters Patent Appeal No. 490 of 2011

3. This Appeal arises from a jud