KALIDIN Vs. KRISHNA NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This review petition has been filed against the judgment dated 22.9.1982 by the Board in revision/reference arising out of restoration matter relating to a suit under Sec. 229-B/209 of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.

(3.) in this case, an ex parte decree had been passed on 9.5.1975 which would be upheld if restoration application stood rejected as in the order dated 22.9.1982 and the learned counsel argued that there was no evidence to support the ex parte decree and so it would be without jurisdiction. He further argued that the learned trial court had not given any judgment and so in the event of rejection of the restoration application, it would be a decree without judgment. He argued that this constituted an error apparent on the face of the record and further argued that since the papers relating to substitution application were under sealed cover, no arguments could be advanced on the date of final-hearing of the restoration application.