ZUBEDA Vs. NATHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS refer­ence has been made by the learned Addi­tional Commissioner, Jhansi by this order dated 14-8-96 passed in Revisions No. 59/39 of 93-94 Banda recommending that the revision be allowed ; the order dated 18-5-94 passed by trial Court be set aside and the case be recommended back to it for fresh decision.

(2.) IT appears that a suit under Section 176 of the UPZA and LR Act was filed, after de-notification under Section 52 of the UPCH Act had been issued. The suit could therefore, proceed on merit and could not be abated under Section 5 of UPCH Act. However, the trial Court held that it had no jurisdiction to proceed in the matter. Against this order the present revision was filed in which reference has been made.

(3.) THE learned Additional Commis­sioner has given cogent reasons in support of his order with which I agree. As a matter of fact after the de-notification under Section 52 of the UPCH Act the suit ought to have been disposed of on its merit. Agree­ing therefore, with the recommendation of the learned Additional Commissioner, I allow .the revision, set aside the order of the trial Court and remand the case to it for fresh decision in the light of the observa­tions made by the learned Additional Commissioner. Revision allowed.