SHAIK ALI Vs. NOOR JAHAN BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that arises for decision in this Letters Patent Appeal is whether an order made by a single Judge of the High Court calling for a finding on an issue framed by him in the appeal is a ' judgment' within the meaning of clause 15 of the Letters Patent.

(2.) The relevant facts which have given rise to the filing of the Letter Patent Appeal are these: The appellants, defendants in the trial Court, filed an appeal against the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 115 of 1958 of the First Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The second defendant (, ppcllant) filed an application for amendment of the written statement and it was permitted after the plaintiff had also filed a rcjoinder. Manohar Pershad, C.J., before whom the appeal came up for hearing in consequence of the permission granted to the sccond defendant to amend the written statement framed an issue which reads: "Are defendants 1 and 2 bonafide purchasers of the suit house for valuable consideration without notice of the alleged agreement to sell between the plaintiff and Ahmed Bin Abood Ramzan ? "

(3.) The learned Chief Justice, however, made it clear: " having regard to the fact that it is a very old suit and parties have adduced their fall evidence, I cannot acce pt the request that parties may be permitted to adduce further evidence."