IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1117 of 2008 BANSHIDHAR TIWARI Versus THAKUR JI TIWARI & ORS ----------- 3 16/1/2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the opposite parties. The issue which has been adjudicated by the court below in the impugned order and decided against the Defendant-petitioner, even if allowed, was not capable of disposing of the suit finally and as such a Civil Revision Application in a strict sense is not maintainable in view of specific bar in proviso to section 115(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure. This Court, however, in order to test the order as to whether it suffers from any jurisdictional error, has examined the matter and has found that the approach of the court below in rejecting the prayer of the defendant-petitioner for exhibiting a deed of mortgage dated 20.6.1968 does not suffer from any jurisdictional error, in as much as, there was no pleading as with regard to the said document in the written statement filed by 2 the petitioner. That being so, whether Raghubans Tiwary was literate or illiterate person could not have been allowed to be proved by that document. The issue with regard to status of Raghubans Tiwary can still be gone into on the basis of existing evidence, but then approach of the court below in rejecting the prayer of the petitioner with regard to proving and exhibiting the deed of mortgage in evidence does not in any event suffer from any infirmity so as to be interfered by this Court in exercise of power under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. That being so, this application being wholly misconceived is hereby dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.) Abhay Kumar