1 Cra-414.10-group Ash IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.414 OF 2010 State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. .. Applicants Vs Ashish Harlalka. .. Respondent -- CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.415 OF 2010 State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. .. Applicants Vs Vinod Kumar Shroff & Others. .. Respondents -- CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.421 OF 2010 State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. .. Applicants Vs Smt. Lalita Devi Jajodia. .. Respondent -- CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.422 OF 2010 State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. .. Applicants Vs Vijay Shankar Bajoria. .. Respondent -- 2 Cra-414.10-group CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.423 OF 2010 State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. .. Applicants Vs Smt. Chandadevi Choudhary. .. Respondent -- CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.424 OF 2010 State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. .. Applicants Vs M/s. Annapurna Properties. .. Respondent -- CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.425 OF 2010 State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. .. Applicants Vs Smt. Krishnadevi Harlalka. .. Respondent -- CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.426 OF 2010 State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. .. Applicants Vs Smt. Shashiprasad BAjoria. .. Respondent -- S/Shri D.Roy Choudhari, Sr.Counsel along with Hemand Prabhulkar and D.G. Dhanure i/by Jurisconsultus for the Applicants. Shri A.S.M. Kazi for the Respondent. -- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 22ND OCTOBER, 2010 3 Cra-414.10-group P.C: . Heard learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Applicants. 2. It is not in dispute that the facts leading to the filing of all these Revision Applications are similar. The challenge in these Civil Revision Applications is to the orders of the Appeal Bench of the Court of Small Causes, Mumbai, by which the applications for condonation of delay in preferring appeals have been dismissed. 3. The appeals were preferred by the Applicants for challenging an order passed on 9th March, 2010 by the Trial Court by which objections raised under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 by the Applicants- Judgment Debtors have been rejected by the Executing Court. The Revision Applicants are the Judgment Debtors and the Respondents are the Decree Holders. When these Revision Applications were placed for admission, a query was made by this Court as to how the appeals were maintainable against the adjudication made of the objections under Section 47 of the said Code. 4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Applicants firstly submitted that the adjudication of any question within the purview of Section 47 of the said Code is a decree which is subject to an appeal under Section 96 of the said Code. He relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari & Ors., ( AIR 1969 SC 4 Cra-414.10-group 575 ). Apart from this decision, he has placed reliance on several other decisions in support of the contention that the adjudication under Section 47 of the said Code being a decree, an appeal under Section 96 of the said Code was maintainable. The second submission made by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Revision Applicants is that the appeal was maintainable under Sub-section (1) of Section 42 of the Presidency Small Causes Court Act, 1882. Inviting attention of the Court to Sub-section (4) of Section 42 of the said Act of 1882, he submitted that even if the appeal is not maintainable, the Appeal Bench of the Court of Small Causes is empowered to call for the record of the case for satisfying itself about the decree and order passed in any suit or proceedings. 5. The execution proceedings arise out of the suits filed in the year 2002. An appeal is a creation of the statute. Even according to the case of the Applicants, the appeal is maintainable under Section 96 of the said Code which provides that an appeal will lie against the every decree passed by any Court exercising original jurisdiction. Prior to the coming into force of the Code of Civil Procedure ( Amendment ) Act, 1976, the determination of any question under Section 47 of the said Code was specifically included in the definition of a decree under Sub-section (2) of Section 2 of the said Code. But, with effect from 1st February, 1977, the reference to Section 47 of the said Code has been deleted from the Sub- section (2) of Section 2 of the said Code by the said Amendment Act of 1976. In view of the amendment, determination of any questions under 5 Cra-414.10-group Section 47 of the said Code is no longer a decree under Section 2(2) of the said Code. Hence, the appeal under Section 96 of the said Code is not maintainable. Most of the decisions relied upon by the Applicant do not consider the effect of 1976 Amendment to the said Code. 6. Proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 42 of the said Act of 1882 provides that no appeal shall lie from a decree or order made in a suit or any proceeding in respect of which no appeal lies under the said Code. Hence, even the appeal under Sub-section (1) of Section 42 of the said Act is not maintainable. The Revision Applicants have preferred the appeals before the Appeal Bench of the Court of Small Causes and they have not invoked revisional jurisdiction. Therefore, it is not necessary to consider whether the Revision Applications were maintainable before the Appeal Bench against the order of Executing Court. 7. Hence, the appeals were not maintainable in law. Hence, it is not necessary to interfere with the orders by which the applications for condonation of delay in preferring Appeals were rejected. There is no merit in the Civil Revision Applications and the same are rejected. 8. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Applicants prays for continuation of ad-interim relief granted earlier by this Court for a period of eight weeks from today. Request is opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the 1st Respondent by contending that one after 6 Cra-414.10-group another, frivolous applications are being made by the Applicants. 9. Ad-interim relief granted earlier by this Court will continue to operate for a period of six weeks from today. (A.S.OKA, J)