ORDER
J.B. Koshy, J.
1. This revision application is filed purportedly under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the decision of the Learned Single Judge of this Court in M.F.A. No. 369/2002. The above judgment was passed in an appeal under Section 113 of the Panchayat Raj Act against an order in Election Petition. According to the petitioner, revision petition has been filed against the order by the appellate court in an appeal filed under Section 113 of the Panchayat Raj Act. It has been held by the Division Bench of this Honourable Court in Sushama v. Mercy Antony as reported in 1999 (3) KLT 818 that Civil Revision Petition is maintainable against the orders passed by the Appellate Court/District Court in appeals filed under Section 113 of the Panchayat Raj Act. The dictum held and laid down in Saraswathy v, Kamala reported in 1997 (1) KLT 855 also holds the same position. Hence the above CRP is maintainable as the impugned order is passed by the Appellate Court under Section 113 of the Panchayat Raj Act. Division Bench in the above decision considered maintainability of revision application when Appellate Court was District Court which was subordinate to the High Court.
2. Section 115 (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure reads as follows:
“115. Revision (1). The High Court may call for the record of any case which has been decided by any .court subordinate to such High Court and in which no appeal lies thereto, and if such subordinate court appears –
a), to have exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or b) to have failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or c) to have acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity, the High Court may make such order in the case as it thinks fit:
(Provided that the High Court shall not, under this section, vary or reverse any order made, or any order deciding an issue, in the course of a suit or other proceeding, except where-
(a) the order, if it had been made in favour of the party applying for revision, would have finally disposed of the suit or other proceeding, or
(b) the order, if allowed to stand, would occasion a failure of justice or cause irreparable injury to the party against whom it was made)”.
3. Since the appeal was disposed of by a learned Single Judge of this Court, Section 115 is not applicable as power of the High Court under Section 115 of CPC is only to revise orders passed by the subordinate courts and not judgments or orders passed by a single Judge of High Court. Therefore, we agree with the registry in not numbering the petition.
This C.R.P. is not maintainable. It is accordingly dismissed.