KIRTY, J. :- Before this Bench, constituted by the learned Chief Justice, following questions fall for consideration and answer : -

(1) Will Civil Revisions arising out of suits of the value of less than twenty thousand rupees or arising out of other proceedings filed in this Court before the U. P. Civil Laws Amendment Act No. 37 of 1972 came into force, not lie here and will have to be sent to the District Courts?

(2) In case the order sought to be revised is passed by a District Judge or any officer exercising the powers of District Judge in an appeal or revision arising out of an original suit of the value of less than twenty thousand rupees, where will a revision lie, if at all?

(3) Does no revision lie from proceedings other than original suits ?

2. The above questions have arisen on account of the amendment in Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) made by Section 6 of the Uttar Pradesh Civil Laws Amendment Act, 1972. This Act, passed by the State Legislature, received the assent of the President of India on 12-9-1972 and was published in the U. P. Gazette dated 16-9-1972. The notification under Section 1 (3) of the Act appointing 20-9-1972 as the date of its enforcement was published in the Gazette of the same date. In the statement of objects and reasons given in the Bill published on July 28, 1972 it was mentioned :-

"In the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 an Uttar Pradesh amendment made in Section 115 conferred concurrent powers of revision on District Judges along with the High Court. It is now proposed that in cases of a value below Rs. 20,000/- this power may be exercised by District Judges alone and in cases of higher valuation this power may be exercised by the High Court. This will eliminate one of the causes of delay in the disposal of suits."

Section 115 of the Code was previously amended by Section 3 of U. P. Civil Laws (Amendment) Act, 1970 (U.P. Act 14 of 1970).

3. Section 115 of the Code, in its original form, read as below :-

"The High Court may call for the record of any case which has been decided by any Court subordinate to such High Court and in which no appeal lies thereto and if such subordinate Court appears -

(a) to have exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or

(b) to have failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or

(c) to have acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity, the High Court may make such order in the case as it thinks fit."

Section 3 of U. P. Act 14 of 1970 provided that for the words "High Court" wherever occurring in Section 115, the words "High Court or District Court" shall be substituted, and that at the end the following proviso shall be inserted :

"Provided that nothing in this Section shall be construed to empower the District Court to call for the record of any case arising out of an original suit of the value of twenty thousand rupees or above."

As amended by Section 6 of U. P. Act 37 of 1972. Section 115 now reads :

"The High Court in cases arising out of original suits of the value of twenty thousand rupees and above, and the District Court in any other case may call for the record of any case which has been decided by any court subordinate to such High Court or District Court, as the case may be and in which no appeal lies thereto, and if such subordinate court appears -

(a) to have exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or

(b) to have failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or

(c) to have acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity. the High Court or the District Court may make such order in the case as it thinks fit."

4. The first question expressly relates to civil revisions filed in this Court before September 20, 1972, i.e., before U. P. Act 37 of 1972 came into force. Intrinsically, there is nothing in the amended Section 115 nor in Act 37 of 1972 requiring revisions which were pending in this Court on the said date to be tra