FAO 64/2000 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.N. SARMA Heard Mr. N. Dhar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. BR Dey, l earned Sr. counsel appearing for the respondents. This appeal is directed against the order dated 19/4/2000 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division, Karimganj in T.S. No.60/91 thereby refusing t o set aside the abatement against the legal representatives of defendant No.2 wh o expired on 15/5/99. Admittedly, the impugned order is appealable order under Order 43 Rule 1 (v) CPC. Under the provisions of Section 106 of CPC where an appeal from any or der is allowed it shall lie to the Court to which an appeal would lie from the d ecree in the suit in which such order was made, or where such order is made by a Court. The valuation of the suit is being Rs.49,000/- at the relevant time, the District Judge concerned was the competent appellate authority to hear the appe al against the order. On being pointed out about this aspect of the matter as raised by Mr. BR Dey, learned Sr. counsel for the respondent, Mr. Dhar learned counsel for the p etitioner prays for allowing him to withdraw the appeal for approaching the appr opriate appellate court. Prayer stands granted. The appeal stands dismissed on withdrawal. It is open for the petitioner to approach the appropriate court, if so a dvised subject to question of limitation. Registry is directed to transmit the LCR forthwith.