JANG BAHADUR Vs. KALAWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference, dated 31-10-1998, made by the learned Additional Commissioner, Jhansi Division, Jhansi, in respect of the revision Petition No. 82/101 of 1996-97/Hamirpur, Jang Bahadur v. Kalawati etc., arising out of the judgment and order, dated 4-4-1997, passed by the learned trial Court in a suit under Section 176 of the UPZA & LR Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), recommending that the impugned order be set aside and the case be remanded to the learned trial Court for decision afresh, on merits, according to law.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts giving rise to the instant reference are that in a suit under Section 176 of the Act, instituted by Jang Bahadur, the preliminary and final decrees were passed on 15-7-1996 and 31-3-1997 respectively and thereafter, on 3-4-1997, a restoration application was moved by Indrapal and Sia Ram,which was allowed and the orders, dated 8-7-1996, 15-7-1996 and 31-3-1997 were set aside, vide the order, dated 4-4-1997, passed by the learned trial Court against which a revision petition was preferred by Jang Bahadur before the learned Additional Commissioner, who has made the instant reference to the Board with his aforesaid recommendation.

(3.) I have closely and carefully considered the submissions, made by the learned Counsel for the parties before me and have also scanned the reference, made by the learned Additional Commissioner as well as the record, on file. Since in his referring order, the learned Additional Commissioner has dealt with the matter in question, at length, in correct perspective of law, touching each and every aspect of the same, with which I also concur, the recommendation made by him deserves acceptance, as the orders, dated 31-3-1997 and 15-7-1997, being the final orders, appear to have been passed after due service of notice upon the applicants to the restoration application and therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the case remanded to the learned trial Court for decision, afresh, on merits, according to law, for the reasons, disclosed by him in his referring order and therefore, the recommendation, made by him very richly deserves acceptance.