RAM SAHAI Vs. SHRAWAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. P. Pendey This is a revision petition under Section 333 of the U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), preferred by Ram Sahai against the order, dated 28-5-2004, passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Jhansi Division, Jhansi , in Appeal No. 46 of 2004, arising out of the orders, dated 15-1- 2003/25-1-2003 and 27-2-2004, 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 parties, on the point of admission of this revision petition and have also perused the record, on file. The thrust of contentions of the learned Counsel for the revisionist inter alia, in a nut-shell, is that since the restoration application under Order IX, Rule 13, CPC, moved by the applicants, who were not parties to the suit, in question, was highly time-barred and no application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, has been filed, the learned trial Court was perfectly justified in rejecting the same and therefore, the learned Additional Commissioner has grossly erred in not appreciating this material aspect of the matter, in question. The learned Counsel for the opposite party, in reply, urged that the impugned order is an interlocutory order against which no revision lies and therefore, the same being not fit for admission, very richly deserves dismissal out right, in limine, as the appeal, in question, is still pending and the revisionist would certainly get ample opportunity to have his say on merits.