SUNDER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision preferred against the judgment and order dated March 12, 1996 passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Moradabad Division, Moradabad arising out of an order dated May 3, 1995 passed by the learned trial Court in a suit under Section 176of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act.

(2.) BRIEF and relevant facts of the ease are that the plaintiff-revisionist instituted a suit under Section 176of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. for the division of their 1/2 share in the disputed land as detailed at the foot of the plaint. On 22-7-1994 an application was moved on behalf of the plaintiffs to withdraw the suit. The learned trial Court by means of its order dated May 3, 1995 allowed this application on the payment of Rs. 25 as cost and with the condition that plaintiffs would file the suit within 30 days. Aggrieved by this order a revision was preferred, the learned Additional Com missioner has dismissed the revision on Marchl2, 1996. Hence this second revision.

(3.) I have carefully and closely con­sidered the contentions., raised by the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records, on file. On perusal of the records, it is crystal clear that the learned trial Court has passed an order dated 3-5-1995, subject to payment of cost of Rs. 25 giving time-limit for 30 days for filing the fresh suit. In view of the case-laws referred to, by the learned counsel for the revisionist. The aforesaid order, passed by the learned trial Court is quite unsus­tainable in law. The learned lower Revisional Court has not properly ex­amined the points at issue in correct perspective of law. As such, it must be quashed.