ANAND PRAKASH Vs. NASEEM UDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAM Janam Singh, Member. This is a reference made by learned Additional Commissioner, Garhwal Division, by his order dated 23-5- 1989 in Revision No. 34/1985-86 arising out of a proceeding under Section 229-B of the U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act, recommending that the revision by allowed to the extent that the plaintiffs be permitted to amend their plaint and the defendant-opposite-party be allowed to file additional written statement and that an issue as suggested by his learned predecessor be also framed in the case.

(2.) BRIEFLY, the facts of the case are that the plaintiffs moved an application under Order VI, Rule 17, C. P. C. before the trial Court for being permitted to amend their plaint to the extent that before them their father remained in posession of the land in question for over 12 years and had ac quired rights of bhumidhari with trans ferable rights. The learned trial Court by his order dated 26-8-1986 rejected the ap plication of the plaintiffs. Feeling ag grieved by this order Anand Prakash and another filed a revision before the learned Additional Commissioner, who has made the present reference.

(3.) AGREEING with the recommendation made by the learned Additional Commissioner 1 accept t he reference and set aside the order of the trial Court, permit the plaintiffs to amend their plaint in the light of the observations made by learned Additional Commis sioner in his order. The defendant- oppsite-party should be allowed to file ad ditional written statement after framing an additional issue the parties by allowed to lead their oral as well as documentary evidence in support of their respective cases, and then the case be decided on merits in accordance with law. .