Mukul Mudgal ( 1 ) THE case was called out and, none appears for any of theparties. Since the revision petition is of the year 1985, it is being taken up today. ( 2 ) THIS revision petition arises from a decree passed by the Civil Judge, Deoria,up and transferred to Delhi for execution. The petitioner therein filed objectionsunder Order XXI Rules 26 and 58 read with Section 437, Civil Procedure Code against the attachmentorder obtained during the execution of the decree. The plea raised by the petitionerwas that the decree was unexecutable against the petitioner. The Appellate Courtby its order dated 27. 3. 1984 has held that the transferee Court in execution is notcompetent to go beyond the decree. I see no reason to interfere with the impugnedorder in the revision. It has been contended inter alia by the petitioner in the revisionpetition that the decree obtained by respondent is by fraud. If this be the casepetitioner may have a remedy to file an appropriate suit for declaration. This hasnot been done. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed. Interim orders standvacated.