CHANDRIKA PRASAD @ SIDDHPAL Vs. GRAM PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition under Section 333 of the UPZA & LR Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), preferred against the judgment and order, dated 8-8-2005, passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Chitrakoot Dham Division, Banda, in revision No. 277/215 of 2003/04/Banda, arising out of the judgment and decree, dated 16-4-2002, passed by the learned trial Court in a suit under Section 229-B of the Act.

(2.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the revisionist and have also perused the relevant papers on file. As a matter of fact, by the impugned order, the learned Additional Commissioner has allowed the revision petition and has remanded the case to the learned trial Court for decision afresh, on merits, according to law, after framing issues properly on the pleadings of the parties, concerned and affording due and reasonable opportunity of being heard and adducing evidence, if any, to them. A bare perusal of the order passed by the learned trial Court clearly reveals that the suit of the plaintiff has been decreed without framing issues and since the same is mandatory in law, such an order and decree cannot be allowed to sustain and this is actually what the learned Court below has done in the instant case. Anyway, the parties have nothing to worry about or feel prejudiced as the doors are still open to them and they shall certainly get ample opportunity to have their say and adduce evidence, if any, before the learned trial Court and therefore, I, in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, am of the considered opinion that this is rather not a fit case for admission, which very richly deserves dismissal, outright in limine.