MOHD.NAEEM Vs. GAINDAN LAL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Smt. Rama Goel, learned counsel for the petitioner. No one appears on behalf of the respondents despite the service of notice.

(2.) BY means of present petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 12.9.2005 passed by the Additional District Judge, Moradabad, by which he has allowed amendment application filed by the respondents and the order dated 3.12.2005 passed by the Additional District Judge, Moradabad by which he has allowed the application for deletion of issue no. 2 and for the addition of some of the issues.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that the amendment application has been allowed just to delay the proceeding. She further submitted that the issue in the suit has been framed with the consent of the parties. The claim of the plaintiffs-respondents was that the property in dispute is a public property on which the Jatav Community had built a Dharmashala, therefore, the respondents have no right to sell such property. She submitted that issue and submission of the plaintiffs have been examined in detail by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Moradabad on the basis of the evidences adduced and the same have been found incorrect, therefore, the suit has been dismissed. She submitted that a fresh issue framed by the Additional District Judge, Moradabad is based on no material and amounts to giving a fresh opportunity to the plaintiffs which is patently without jurisdiction. She further submitted that no reason has been given for framing the further issues.