A.M. Pal, J. - (1.) This application for revision under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure arises out of an order No. 36 dated 2.7.83 passed by learned Additional Munsif, Sealdah directing police help for possession of the premises for which decree had been obtained by the Decree-holder opposite parties (here represented by Mr. Mitra assisted by Mr. Saha).
(2.) Learned Munsif in granting police help made the following observation : "Considering all aspects, I am of the opinion that in the interest of justice instant petition is allowed ". The decree-holder has obtained the decree after contesting the suit by a competent court and he has complied with all the legal provisions. He is entitled to enjoy the fruit of the decree.
(3.) Mr. Bagchi, Counsel for the judgment-debtor, challenged this order of the learned Munsif on two-fold grounds. First the case was not made out for such police help as provided under Rule 208 of the Civil Rules and orders. His second contention is that the learned Munsif did not consider all aspects of the matter before making such an order. The summary of his argument is that the learned Munsif failed to adjudicate rather did not adjudicate upon the matter in the light of the provisions as provided under Rule 208 of the Civil Rules and orders which enumerate the grounds and the occasions where court would make such an order. Mr. Mitra, Counsel for the decree-holder, contended that the application for revision has no legal foundation and is untenable both in law and in facts. His argument is that learned Munsif considering all the aspects and provisions as provided under Order 21 Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure as well as under Rule 208 of the Civil Rules and Orders has made the order for police help and that cannot be challenged here in this revisional jurisdiction because there is no ex facie error on the part of the learned Munsif. His other contention is that the application does not lie because the real legal remedy which would have been available under the law to the petitioner is an appeal under Order 21 Rule 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure and not under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. His contention is that under Order 21 Rule 103 the order of the learned Munsif has the force of a decree and therefore he should have filed an appeal to the Lower Appellate Court and only by way of second appeal he could have moved this court if leave would have been allowed.;