JUDGMENT Bhairo Prasad, Member. - This revision was dismissed before it was admitted on 25.7.1990, hence restoration was filed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist on the point of admission today. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist argued that he has moved the Civil Court in order to prove his right and title regarding the allotted land. The order of the Civil Court will prevail over the order passed in a proceeding under Rule 115-P of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Rules. 4. The proceeding was decided by the Additional Collector on the ground that the allotment in question was made by the Land Management Committee when there was a stay order by the court, therefore, he has cancelled the abadi leases of the revisionist. A revision was filed against that order was also dismissed by the Additional Commissioner on 28.2.1990. For the purpose of these proceedings this order has become final and there is no ground for revisional interference. However, the order and judgment of the Civil Court will prevail over the order of the Revenue Court because the proceedings of Rule 15-P are summary in nature and they are subject to the decision of the revenue court, hence there is no force in the reference, hence it is not admitted and is summarily rejected.