IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2008 / 3RD SRAVANA 1930 CRP.No. 30 of 2004() --------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12/12/2003 IN EA 44/03 IN EP 15/02 IN OS.89/1998 of MUNSIFF COURT, IDUKKI .................... REVN. PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN E.A: --------------------------------------------------------- AMMINI. W/O. CHAKKAN, OLIKKAL HOUSE, KANJIKUZHI VILLAGE, CHURULIPPATHAL TRIBAL COLONY, MAZHUVADY, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON P.JOHN SRI.RAJU VADAKKEKKARA SRI.BABY MATHEW RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENT IN E.A: -------------------------------------------------------- 1. ALEYAMMA, W/O. SAMUEL, AGED 66 YEARS, NADUPARAMBIL HOUSE, KATHIPPARA KARA, VELLATHOOVAL VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. SAJI, S/O.SAMUEL, AGED 30 YEARS, -DO- -DO- 3. CHAKKAN, S/O. NAGAN, OLIKKAL HOUSE, KANJIKUZHI VILLAGE, CHURULIPPATHAL TRIBAL COLONY, MAZHUVADY, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.N.SANJITH - R2 SRI.JAISON JOSEPH - R2 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/07/2008 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------------------ C.R.P. NO. 30 OF 2004 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 25th day of July, 2008 O R D E R Petitioner is the wife of the judgment debtor in O.S. 89 of 1998 on the file of Munsiff Court, Idukki. E.P. 15 of 2002 was filed for execution of Ext.P2 decree declaring his title and recovery of possession of the decree schedule property. Petitioner filed E.A. 44 of 2003, an application under Rule 97 of Order XXI of Code of Civil Procedure. Learned Munsiff, after evaluating the evidence, dismissed the petition. This petition is filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure challenging the said order. 2. Rule 103 of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that where any application has been adjudicated as provided under Rule 98 or Rule 100, the order made thereon shall have the same force and be subject to the same condition as to an appeal, or otherwise, as if it were a decree. A petition filed under Rule 97 of Order XXI of the Code is to be adjudicated as provided under Rule 98. Under Rule 101 of Order XXI of the Code, all questions including questions CRP30/2004 2 relating to right, title or interest in the property, arising between the parties to a proceeding on an application and relevant to the adjudication of the application shall be determined by the Court. Hence the order passed in the application is to be challenged in an appeal. Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that a revision will lie only if no appeal will lie. When the order passed dismissing the application filed under Rule 98 of Order XXI is to be challenged in an appeal, no revision will lie. Hence the revision is not maintainable. Revision petition is dismissed. Petitioner is entitled to challenge the order in the appeal. M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE Okb/-