Bhubneshwari Prasad And Another v. Mohan Lall And Others Opposite Parties.

1. Having regard to the decision in Chandramani Koer v. Basdeo Narayan Singh(1), it is apparent that an appeal will lie against an order made rejecting the plaint in this case. We see no reason therefore to interfere at this stage. It may be that in Bankey Behari v. Ram Bahadur(2) a Divisional Bench of this Court interfered with an interlocutory order of this description, but generally the cursus curiae of the Calcutta High Court and of this Court has always been not to take action under S. 115, when there is another course open and no irremediable harm can be suffered by the interlocutory order.

2. The learned Subordinate Judge will no doubt give the necessary extension of time for the filing of the deficit court-fee.

3. The application for revision is therefore rejected.

V.S/R.K

4. Rule discharged.