JUDGMENT

Iqbal Ahmad, J. - The questions of law that arise for decision in this and the connected Civil Revision No. 84 of 1937 are : (1) Whether this Court can in the exercise of its revisional jurisdiction interfere with orders passed by Courts below u/s 5(1), U.P. Agriculturists' Belief Act (Act 27 of 1934)? (2) Whether an application for the conversion of a decree for money into a decree payable by instalments is to be filed in the Court of first instance which decided the suit or in the Court which on appeal or revision passed the ultimate decree in the cause?, and (3) Whether the words "any decree for money" in Section 5, U.P. Agriculturists' Belief Act mean only a decree passed on the basis of a "loan" as defined by the Act or include decrees for money of any description whatsoever? The answer to these questions depends on the true interpretation of Section 5 of the Act, the relevant portion of which is-as follows:

5. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Coda of Civil Procedure 1908, the Court shall, unless for reasons to be recorded directs it otherwise, at any time, on the application of the judgment-debtor and after notice to the decree-holder, direct that any decr