1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6610/2008 {Rajendra Kumar Versus Additional District & Session Judge & Others} Date of Order :: 4th September, 2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN Mr. Bihari Lal Agarwal for the petitioner Mr. M.M. Ranjan for the respondents BY THE COURT: Admit. Mr. Ranjan appears for the contesting respondents. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. This writ petition on behalf of the defendant-petitioner is directed against the impugned order dated 3rd July, 2008, whereby his application under Order 13 Rule 2 readwith Section 151 CPC has been rejected. 4. I have examined the impugned order passed by the trial court in the light of submissions raised on behalf of both the parties and after considering the same, I find that order passed by the trial court is self- speaking and well reasoned and no interference is called for in the same. There is no error of jurisdiction in the impugned order so as to interfere with the same also. 4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Babhutmal 2 Raichand Oswal Versus Laxmibai R. Tarte and another {AIR 1975 Supreme Court 1297} held that the High Court cannot in guise of exercising its jurisdiction under Article 227 convert itself into a court of appeal when the legislature has not conferred a right of appeal and made the decision of the subordinate court or tribunal final on facts. The High Court cannot, while exercising jurisdiction under Article 227, interfere with findings of fact recorded by the subordinate court or tribunal. It's function is limited to seeing that the subordinate court or tribunal functions within the limits of its authority. It cannot correct mere errors of fact by examining the evidence and re-appreciating it. 5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Yunus Versus Mohd. Mustaqim {AIR 1984 Supreme Court 38} held that in exercising the supervisory power under Article 227, the High Court does not act as an appellate court or Tribunal. 6. In view of above, there is no merit in this writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed with no order as to costs. (NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN),J.