ORDER :- The District Judge, Budaun dismissed a revision as not maintainable on the ground that an appeal lay. The District Judge further held that the prayer for the conversion of the revision into an appeal could not be granted as the prayer was made after the period of filing the appeal had expired.

2. It was urged on behalf of the revisionist that the view taken by the learned District Judge was manifestly erroneous as the Court had power to order the conversion of a revision into an appeal where the revision was filed within the time provided for the filing of an appeal. It was further urged that since the District Judge was also competent to hear the appeal against the order of the learned Munsif he should have treated the revision as an appeal and heard it on merits. The failure on his part to do so has resulted in an erroneous exercise of jurisdiction.

3. The trial court while setting aside an ex parte decree, under O. IX, R. 13 C.P.C. imposed certain conditions. One of the conditions was the deposit of the entire decretal amount in court and the other was the payment of Rs. 40 as costs within 30 days failing which the application was to stand rejected. In the revision filed

Click Here to Read the rest of this document