CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY,

NAYAYA NAGAR, MITHAPUR, PATNA-800001

A ROUGH DRAFT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE COURSE

The Code Of Civil Procedure,1908, 5thSemester during the Year 2020-21

SUBMITTED BY:
AMIT DIPANAKAR
Roll No. – 20181609
B.B.A LL.B

SUBMITTED TO:

Dr. Meeta Mohini

Faculty of The Code Of Civil Procedure,[1908]

JANUARY, 2019
CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY,
NAYAYA NAGAR, MITHAPUR,
PATNA-800001

Ram Kanvar vs Ram Ricchhpal Banarsi Dass

(AIR 2003 P H 38, 2002 (95) FLR 828)
INTRODUCTION:
This is a revision petition directed against the order dated 6.3.2002 passed by the executing
Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rewari in which a direction has been issued directing the
Treasury Officer, Rewari to remit the amount of 2/3rd pension of the judgment debtor-petitioner
till the realisation of the decretal amount of Rs.20,740/- plus interest payable at the rate of 12%
per annum.

The decree holder-respondent had filed a civil suit No.1535 dated 3.1.1992 against the judgment
debtor-petitioner which was decreed on 19.11.1996 by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rewari.
The decree holder-petitioner filed an application for execution of the afore-mentioned decree for
recovery of decretal amount of Rs.20,740/- plus interest payable at the rate of 12% per annum
from the date of filing of the execution petition. The warrants of attachment were issued for
attaching the pension of the judgment debtor-petitioner to the extent of 2/3rd till the realisation
of the decretal amount. The executing Court passed the following order:

"Attachment warrant has been received after execution. Treasuiy Officer, Rewari is directed to
remit the amount of 2/3rd pension of the Judgment-debtor till the realisation of the decretal
amount of Rs.20,740/- + interest payable on this amount at the rate of 12 percent per annum from
the date of filing of the execution petition. Now to come up on 8.6.2002 for awaiting payment. A
copy of this order be sent to T.O. Rewari."

The grievance made before me now is that the above mentioned order dated 6.3.2002 suffers
from legal infirmities and the same should be invalidated. The plea set up by the judgment
debtor-petitioner is that no notice of the application was given to him and he has been getting
only Rs. 1.800/- as pension which cannot be attached. It is further pleaded that he is 60 years old.
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
1. I NTRODUCTION
2. CASE ANALYSIS
3. NATURE ,SCOPE AND POWER OF REVISION UNDER C.P.C
4. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REVISION AND REVIEW
5. CASE LAWS RELATING TO REVISION
6. CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Research Methodology:
The researcher has adopted doctrinal method of research. It is a theoretical research and it is pure
in nature. The author has used secondary sources of study. The materials used for the purpose of
this study include various statistical reports, various studies made by eminent organizations,
legislations and e-sources.

Objectives:-
1. To analyse the scope of Revision.
2. To study on the circumstance when Revision can be applied.
3. To find out the power of High Court under Constitution.
4. To study on difference between Revision and Review.
5. To study on difference between Revision and Appeal.