IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, AT NAINITAL Civil Revision No. 26 of 2009 Sri Devendra Kumar. ………..…Revisionist. Versus Sri Ravi Kumar. ……Respondent. Mr. Nand Prasad, Advocate for the revisionist. Dated :- October 06, 2009 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, ACJ. Heard Mr. Nand Prasad, Advocate for the revisionist. The present Civil Revision has been filed by the defendant against the order of the Trial Court dated 10.07.2009 by which the defendant’s objection against the Survey Commission Report has been rejected and the report has been accepted. In my opinion, this is an interlocutory order against which a revision under section 115 Civil Procedure Code does not lie since no issue has been decided finally nor such an order has been passed which causes any irreparable injury or failure of justice in so far as the defendant is concerned. Further, this Court finds that this order can easily be challenged under Section 105 of Code of Civil Procedure after the suit is decided in an appropriate appeal, if any. Even otherwise, the revisionist has a remedy to adduce the evidence before Trial Court rebutting the commission’s report. In view of the aforesaid, this Court does not find any error in the impugned order. The revision is dismissed. (Tarun Agarwala, ACJ.) Dated 06.10.2009 SKS/ Shiv