UMEDSINGH AND OTHERS Vs. VAIJAYANTIBAI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellants defendants against an order passed by 3rd A.D.J. Bhopal in C.A. No. 24-A/78, dated 11-12-1979.

(2.) It appears that against the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, the respondents-plaintiffs have preferred an appeal. At the time of hearing of this appeal, an application for amendment of written statement was made by the present appellants-defendants alleging that Smt. Rampyaribai had remarried and had thus lost her interest in the property of her husband. The learned lower appellate Court allowed this application for amendment, but set aside the decree of the trial Court and remanded the whole case for a fresh trial.

(3.) The grievance made by the appellants in this appeal is that as they were respondents in the lower appellate court and interested in supporting the decree, the learned judge, only because he allowed the amendment application, set aside the decree which is not justified. It was contended that the only question in the amendment raised was about the fact of her right to the property after her remarriage and that being a pure question of law, could have been disposed of by the learned court itself.