CLR 77/2002 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. List has been revised. None has appeared on behalf of the revisionist. Sri B.D. Upadhyaya, Advocate has appeared on behalf of the respondent No. 1. The perusal of the impugned order passed by the Incharge Civil Jude (Senior Division), Dehradun on 19-7-2002, shows that there is no error of jurisdiction in the impugned order passed by the court below. It also does not reveal form the impugned order that the court below has acted in the exercise of his jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity. The revision is accordingly dismissed. It appears form the order dated 8-10-2002 passed by this court in the revision that the operation of the impugned order dated 19-7-2002 passed by the court below was stayed. In view of the aforesaid situation the court below was at liberty to proceed with the case pending over there. I therefore do not find any reason to pass an order in this regard. The trial court is at liberty to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) 12-04-2006 ISB