JUDGMENT : P.K. Mohanty, J. - This civil revision is directed against an order of the learned Subordinate Judge of Puri dismissing an application u/s 151, CPC for restoration of a plaint which had been rejected for non-payment of Court-fees. 2. The Petitioner-Petitioner filed Money Suit No. 366 of 1972 for realisation of Rs. 9,397/- alleged to have been borrowed by the Defendants from him on 14-1-1969 on the basis of a hand-note. The plaint was presented on 14-11-1972 with a Court-fee of Re. 0.05 p. only. The hand note alleged to have been executed by the Defendants was not filed along with the plaint. Although afforded ample opportunity to pay the required Court-fee and to file the suit handnote the Petitioner did not do so with the result that the plaint was eventually rejected on 16-1-1973. The Petitioner then made an application purporting to be u/s 151, CPC for restoration of the suit. The application was allowed on 4-7-1973 on condition that the Petitioner paid the requisite Court-fee on plaint by 16-7-1973 failing which the miscellaneous case u/s 151, CPC would be deemed to have been automatically dismissed. On 16-7-1973 the Petitioner filed a petition praying for extension of time to pay the Court-fees. The learned Subordinate Judge was not satisfied with the grounds stated in toe petition. Accordingly, he rejected the petition and dismissed toe miscellaneous case u/s 151, Code of Civil Procedure. It is against this order that the present Civil Revision has been preferred. 3. The order rejecting the plaint is a decree within the meaning of Section 2(2), CPC and is appealable as such. Such an order cannot be set aside u/s 151, CPC as there is a right of appeal. It was open to the Petitioner to have preferred an appeal against the order rejecting the plaint. That has not been done. The learned Subordinate Judge had, therefore, no power to restore the suit u/s 151, Code of Civil Procedure. This view finds support from a series of decisions of the Patna High Court holding that an order rejecting a plaint for non-payment of Court-fees is tantamount to a decree and the Court has no power to restore the suit in exercise of its inherent powers Vide Rameshwardhari Singh and Another Vs. Sadhu Saran Singh and Another, ; Ganga Prasad and Another Vs. Sm. Girja Devi, ; Radhanath Jha Vs. Sadhu Saran Singh and Another, ; Ganga Prasad and Another Vs. Sm. Girja Devi, ; Radhanath Jha Vs. Bacha Lal Jha and Others, and Mahanth Ram Das Chela Vs. Ganga Das, . 4. I am also not satisfied that the impugned order suffers from any jurisdictional errors envisaged u/s 115, Code of Civil Procedure. 5. There is no merit in this civil revision and it is, accordingly, dismissed, but in the circumstances without any order as to costs. Final Result : Dismissed