PRASAD DATTATRAYA PRABHUNE Vs. SURESH NAROTTAMDAS PARMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The notice on the special leave petition stated that the matter might be disposed of at this stage, by an order setting aside the order under challenge and restoring the revision application to the High Court to be heard and disposed of afresh.

(3.) The respondents were the plaintiffs in a suit before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune. The appellant filed an application for framing of additional issues in the suit. The learned Civil Judge, Senior division, rejected the application. Thereagainst, the appellant filed a civil revision application in the High Court. It appears that the matter was heard on 26th October 1999, when Counsel, on behalf of the appellant, stated that no reply had been filed by the other side to the application for framing additional issues. On that basis, the learned Single Judge, hearing the civil revision application, ordered notice to issue. On the next day, counsel for the appellant went to the learned Single Judge and stated that he was in error and that a short reply had been filed by the other side to the application for framing additional issues. The learned Single Judge, thereupon, recalled the order of notice; he then stated that he found no question of jurisdiction was involved, and rejected the civil revision application. We are of the view, in the circumstances, that the interests of justice require the civil revision application to be heard and disposed of on merits.