SHAHID HASAN Vs. AQUEEL AHMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri D.V. Jaiswal learned Counsel for the Appellant, Sri S.K. Upadhaya holding brief of Sri N.K. Rastogi for Respondent Nos. 1 to 8, Sri A.D. Singh holding brief of Sri Aquil Ahmad for Respondent No. 9 and Sri R.R. Yadav for Respondent No. 10 and 11.

(2.) According to Sri D.V. Jaiswal learned Counsel for the Appellant the Appellant was Defendant No. 4 in the suit. He is aggrieved by the order dated 19.9.1992 passed in Civil Appeal No. 82 of 1992 and Misc. Appeal No. 41 of 1992 whereby the Civil Appeal No. 82 of 1992 has been allowed and the Commissioners report paper No. 45-C and preparation of final decree has been set aside and the matter was remanded to the Trial Court. He is also aggrieved from the direction of the Appellate Court for preparation of Kurras of all the co-sharers in view of paper No. 39-A which was a compromise, entered into between the parties. The Appellate Court had directed the Trial Court to issue fresh commission for preparation of partition scheme in view of the compromise paper No. 39-A. The impugned order also has allowed the appeal No. 41 of 1992 whereby it has allowed the application filed under Order 1, Rule 10, Code of Civil Procedure by Shoib Ahmad for being impleaded as a party in the proceedings.

(3.) According to Sri Jaiswal the compromise paper No. 39-A was subject matter of challenge and by an order dated 27.6.1984 passed in Misc. Case No. 8 of 1983 the 1st Additional District Judge, Moradabad found that the compromise had been signed only by Defendant Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 whereas Defendant No. 4 (Appellant herein) had not signed the compromise hence he was not a party to the compromise and the Kurras could not be prepared in view of the compromise. The Revisional Court had rejected the review application filed by the Respondents. Against the aforesaid order dated 27.4.1984 passed in Case No. 8 of 1983 a writ Petition No. 12749 of 1983 was filed which was dismissed by this Court on 20.10.1983.