IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 5153 of 2009 Date of decision : September 15, 2010 Mam Chand and another ....Appellants versus State Bank of Patiala ....Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioners Mr. GS Anand, Advocate, for the respondent L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Defendants have filed the instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing order dated 24.3.2009 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jagadhri thereby ordering passing of final decree. In suit filed by respondent against the petitioners, preliminary decree dated 1.2.2006 was passed for recovery of the suit amount with interest by sale of mortgaged property. On application moved by the respondent-decree holder, the trial court vide impugned order dated 24.3.2009 has passed final decree which is under challenge in the instant revision petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Learned counsel for the respondent contended that the instant revision petition is not maintainable as impugned order accompanied by final decree is appealable. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended Civil Revision No. 5153 of 2009 -2- that the petitioners had filed appeal against the impugned order and decree but the appeal was orally not entertained by learned District Judge and was returned without passing any order. I have carefully considered the rival contentions. Admittedly, impugned order and consequent final decree are appealable. Consequently, the instant revision petition is not maintainable. As regards contention of counsel for the petitioners that the appeal was orally not entertained by the District Judge and was returned without passing any order, suffice to observe that no such plea has even been raised in the instant revision petition. Even otherwise the plea is completely fictitious and vexatious because the appeal is presented before the Superintendent in the office of District Judge and is not directly presented to the District Judge. The Superintendent entertains the appeal and thereafter puts it before the District Judge. Consequently, the question of the District Judge not orally entertaining the appeal and returning it without passing any order does not arise. Since the revision petition is not maintainable, the revision petition is dismissed without expressing any opinion on the merits. As prayed by learned counsel for the petitioners, amount of Rs 2 lacs deposited by the petitioners with Registrar (Judicial) of this Court pursuant to interim order be released to the respondent-decree holder. ( L.N. Mittal ) September 15, 2010 Judge 'dalbir'