HARBANS KAUR Vs. HARDEV KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has been filed by defendants Nos. 2 and 3. Judgment and decree dated April 16, 2003, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sangrur had been challenged. Learned Additional District Judge vide the aforesaid order had set aside the judgment and decree dated September 10, 1999 passed by the learned trial Court and remanded the case back to it for fresh decision.

(2.) THE facts which emerge from the record show that suit for joint possession and for permanent injunction was filed by the plaintiffs Hardev Kaur, Balbir Kaur and Raj Mohinder Kaur. In the aforesaid suit Bant Singh, Harbans Kaur, Guddi (minor), Sukhdev Kaur, Gurmail Singh and Nohar Singh were impleaded as defendants.

(3.) THE learned appellate court while considering the application noticed that the guardian of the minor, Guddi, had not been appointed by the plaintiff and, therefore, the provisions of Order 32, Rule 3 of the Code have not been complied with. Consequently, the judgment and decree of the learned trial court were set aside and the matter was remanded back to the learned trial court for fresh decision after compliance of the provision of Order 32, Rules 3 and 4 of the Code. The aforesaid order of the learned trial court has now been assailed by defendants Nos. 2 and 3 before his court.