1. This is a revision petition against the order of the Munsiff Karnah dated 28-2-1975 recording compromise on the basis of which the court proceeded to pass the decree in favour of the plaintiff-petitioners.

2. A preliminary objection has been raised by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent that the order is appealable under Order 43 R.l(m), therefore the revision is in competent. It is argued that, the order recording compromise is appealable notwithstanding the fact that the court has passed decree consequent upon it. Reliance is placed on A. I. R. 1954 J & K 54.

3. This objection is met by the learned counsel for the petitioner by enunciating the view that no appeal lies against the consent decree. In the present case as the decree has followed the order recording compromise therefore it being a consent decree is not appealable in terms of Section 96 of C. P. C.

4. I am, however, unable to accede to this argument. The petitioner has in unequivocal terms claimed the setting aside of the order of the trial court recording the compromise. This is evident from the prayer column of the revision petition. In other words the revision is not against the consent decree but a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document