SHANTI Vs. TARAWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts of the case are that Harpat and Karma were the sons of Umru. Harpat died in 1947 leaving his sole heir plaintiff-petitioner Shanti. Karma died leaving two daughters Tarawati and Ram Piari. Tarawati is defendant No. l. Ram Piari also died. Her son Thambu is defendant No. 2. Plaintiff-petitioner Shanti filed a suit for declaration that she is owner in possession of 1/4th share of Harpat in the joint Khewat. Her suit was decreed by the trial Court. Tarawati and others filed Civil Appeal No. 185-88 against that judgment and decree. When that appeal was pending, they moved an amendment petition and while allowing that amendment petition the appellate Court set aside the lower Court's judgment and decree. Plaintiff-petitioner filed revision against that order of the appellate Court, which was allowed by this Court and the appellate Court was directed that it should call for a report from the trial Court on the issues arising out of the amended written statement and after receiving the report, the appeal should be decided by the appellate Court. Till then the appeal was to remain pending before the appellate Court. Thereafter the appellate Court framed issues by impugned order dated December 18, 1995, as under :

(2.) THE plaintiff-petitioner has filed this revision against this order of the appellate Court.

(3.) THE defendant-respondents' learned counsel has placed on record amendment petition. a perusal of this petition reveals that in paras 1 and 3 specific pleas were raised about limitation, custom and ancestral property. Thus, in my considered view, the appellate court has rightly framed issues 4-A, 4-B and 4-C.