This civil revision petition is filed by the revision petitioner/judgment debtors 1, 2 and 5 as against the order dated 22.04.2009 in E.A.No.2477 of 2009 in E.P.No.1623 of 2007 in A.R.C.No.1960 of 2005 passed by the Learned IX Assistant City Civil Court Judge, Madras in dismissing the application filed by the revision petitioner under Order 21 Rule 106 of the Civil Procedure Code.
2. It is quite evident from Order 43 Rule 1 *(ja) that as against the order passed in E.A.No.2477 of 2009 dated 22.04.2009 in rejecting an application made under Sub Rule (1) of Rule 106 of Order XXI an appeal shall lie before the competent forum.
3. In this connection this Court worth recalls the decision V.A. Narayana Raja v. O. RM. M. SV. M. Meyyappa Chettiar and others in 1975 Madras 36 wherein it is held that an order rejecting an application under Rule 106(1) of Civil Procedure Code is an appealable order under Order 43(1) *(ja) of the Civil Procedure Code.
4. As far as the present case is concerned inasmuch as the E.A.No.2477 of 2009 has been filed under Order 21 Rule 106 of the Civil Procedure Code before the Executing Court and the same having been dismissed, then the proper remedy for the revision petitioner in the eye of Law is to approach the competent forum by means of preferring an appeal in the manner known to law. But in the present case on hand the revision petitioner/judgment debtors 1,2,and 5 have preferred this Civil Revision Petition which is admittedly, not maintainable in the considered of this Court and viewed in this perspective the civil revision petition is devoid on merits and the same is dismissed as not maintainable.
5. In fine, the civil revision petition is dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case there shall be no orders as to costs in this revision. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2009 praying for stay of all further proceedings in E.P.No.1623 of 2007 is closed.
prm To The IX Assistant City Civil Court, Madras