ANIS Vs. NANWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts Are : On 14-9-1992 there connected appeals are dismissed by my learned predecessor.

(2.) Aggrieved by the order, defendant-appellant Anis moves a restoration application that his counsel was not separately heard. In reply it was contended by plaintiff Rahmat Ullah that his suit finally stand dismissed. So Anis suffers no injury, has no locus standi to move. On 26-2-1993 the restoration application is dismissed.

(3.) Again on 12-3-1993 Anis moves an application on that final order dated 14-9-1972 is abjure as to whose name in revenue papers shall finally be recorded in. He says the final order directs that name shall be entered of the party as was noted at time of institution of the suit. But in the meanwhile the name of Anis is lawfully mutated by order of Naib Tahsildar. So it clarifies that name of Anis's shall be entered in. On 12-3-1993 my learned predecessor has clarified the position that name of Anis shall so continue.