JUDGMENT D. K. Seth, J.
1. The judgment and decree dated 23.7.1994 passed by Civil Judge, Roorkee, district Haridwar in Original Suit No. 103 of 1984, has been sought to be quashed in this writ petition. I am afraid that writ jurisdiction can be invoked for quashing judgment and decree passed by the civil court in civil suit. The judgment and decree is appealable under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Admittedly, no appeal has been filed. The decree has been put into execution. In such circumstances, writ jurisdiction cannot come to the rescue of the petitioner. The writ court lacks jurisdiction to quash the judgment and decree passed by the civil court which is otherwise appealable not only once but twice. The Code of Civil Procedure has made adequate provision for remedy of grievance of the aggrieved person upto the Apex Court by means of appeal and various other proceedings provided therein. There is no provision for stretching writ jurisdiction for the purposes of providing remedy to the grievance of the petitioners in such a matter. Therefore, the writ petition is wholly misconceived and fails. The writ petition is dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners then contends that he may be permitted to pay the said amount in instalments. It would be open to him to approach the executing court, if the petitioners are so eligible and it is open to them under law to apply for instalments, in accordance with law.