D.S.Sinha - (1.) HEARD Sri Murli Dhar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Subodh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No. 1.
(2.) THE applicant is aggrieved by the order dated 9th February, 1989 whereby the court below has declined to grant permission to the applicant to transfer the property under attachment in persuance of an alleged agreement of sale dated 28th January, 1985. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case the court below has come to the conclusion that there is no compelling or extraordinary or exceptional circumstance which may warrant permission sought for by the applicant. Before this court also it has not been demonstrated that there exist any compelling extra-ordinary or exceptional circumstance for justifying permission of the court to transfer the property under attachment.
(3.) THE proviso to section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, hereinafter referred to as the Code, as amended by the State of U. P., provides that revisional court shall not vary or reverse any order including an order deciding an issue, made in the course of a suit or other proceeding, except where the order, if so varied or reversed would finally dispose of the suit or other proceeding ; or the order, if allowed to stand, would occasion failure of justice or cause irreparable injury to the party against whom it was made. Admittedly, the order impugned in the instant revision even if varied or reversed would not finally dispose of the suit or other proceeding. Thus the first requirement of the proviso is not satisfied. So far as the second requirement is concerned this court is, in the absence of any tangible material on record, satisfied that if the order is allowed to stand it would not occasion a failure of justice or cause any irreparable injury to the applicant.;