This CRP is directed against the order of the District Judge in C.M.A. No. 18/99 on the file of III Additional Sub Court, Ernakulam, which was filed against the order dtd. 17-6-1999 on I.A. No. 2834/99 in O.S. No. 690/99 on the file of the II Additional Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the CRP is not maintainable as an order in C.M.A. is appealable under Order 43 Rule 1 (r) C.P.C. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, Section 104 (2) of the CPC specifically bars appeals and hence CRP alone is maintainable. S. 104 deals with appeals from orders. Section 104 (2) provides as follows :

"No appeal shall lie from any order passed in appeal under this Section"

The earliest decision on this point is Chellappan v. K. P. Varughese, 1964 AIR(Kerala) 23. While dealing with Section 104 (2), 107, 115 and order XLIII Rule 1 Justice Madhavan Nair held as follows :

"the appeal to the High Court against an interlocutory order passed by a District Judge in an Appeal under S. 104 read with Order XLIII CPC was incompetent and therefore liable to be dismissed in limine;

that as no case for a revision under S. 115 CPC was m