ARUN MADAN, J.

( 1 ) THE above noted revision petition was initially preferred as an appeal vide C. M. A. No. 35/96 under Section 32 (9) of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred as the "act of 1951") against the Order dated 19-12-1995, passed by the learned District Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Civil Execution Case No. 19/87. On 19th April 1996 the learned counsel for the parties were directed to address arguments regarding the maintainability of the appeal under the Act. During the course of hearing, Shri Mandhana, learned counsel for the appellant had stated at the bar that the said appeal may be treated as revision against the Order dated 19-12-1995 passed by the learned District Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur instead of appeal. He had further stated that under a bona fide belief that appeal was maintainable under the Act, he had preferred the appeal, but subsequently it transpired that revision should have been filed instead of appeal. He had further stated at the bar that it is a settled practice of law that in order to save limitation and when the case has to be heard and decided on merits and under a bona fide mistake, the proper remedy has not