JUDGMENT :

A. Pasayat, J. - The correotaass of the conclusion regarding maintainability of an appeal, is the Subjsct-mattar of the adjudication in this revision application.

2. Since the pivotal issue is one of law, detailed reference to the factual aspects is unnecessary and shorn of irrelevant, the fact situation is as follows :

While considering a petition under Order 39, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1903 (in short the 'Code'), the learned Munsif, Kendrapara passed an order appointing a receiver in respect of the suit property instead of granting injunction. The petitioners assailed the correctness of the said order in appeal Considering the order appointing receiver to have been passed in exercise of the jurisdiction u/s 151 of the Code, the learned Subordinate Judge, Kendrapara held the appeal to be not maintainable. The conclusion has been characterised as contrary to law and forms the subject-matter of challenge.

3. For resolution of the question whether the appeal was maintainable, it is necessary to refer to the provisions of Order 39, Rule 1, of the Code, and the scope and ambit thereof. Rule 1 of Order 39 is primarily concerned with the preservation of property in