Heard. Previous adjournment cost of Rs.5,000/- has been paid today to the counsel for respondent no.1 by the petitioner counsel.. Vide order dated 4.1.2007 passed by the District Forum, the complaint of respondent no.1 was allowed and petitioner/opposite party was directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,400/- as cost of the damaged tyres to respondent no.1. Further, petitioner was directed to pay Rs.2,000/- as compensation as well as Rs.1,000/- as cost of litigation to the respondent no.1. In view of the decision of urgaon Gramin Bank Vs. Khazani and another, IV (2012) CPJ 5 (SC) since paltry sum of Rs.7,400/- only is involved in this case, we are not inclined to entertain the present revision petition. The question of law raised in this petition is left open to be decided in an appropriate case. However, this order shall not be treated as a precedent. It is also pointed out that, at the time of admission of this petition, the petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/-. Accordingly, learned counsel for the parties state that out of that amount of Rs.10,000/- sum of Rs.7,400/- as awarded by the District Forum, be paid to the respondent no.1. Hence, it is ordered that out of Rs.10,000/- as deposited by the petitioner, a sum of Rs.7,400/- only be paid to the respondent no.1, after due identification. The balance amount shall be paid to the petitioner. With these observations, the present revision petition stand disposed of. Dasti to both parties.