JEHAL MAHTO Vs. MAHABIR MAHTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision petition has been preferred by the abovenamed plaintiff-petitioner against the order dated 26.8.1991 passed by Munsif, Koderma in Title Suit No. 40 of 1987 on the ground that without appreciating the orders passed by this Court in Civil Revision application No. 358 of 1991 (R), the learned court below has rejected the petition filed by the petitioner for recording his objection and giving opportunity for consideration of his objection regarding the admissibility of the document.

(2.) Mr. P.C. Roy appearing for and on behalf of the petitioner submits that the earlier order passed in the Civil Revision, had given direction to the court to consider the objections raised by the petitioner, but I do not find any such direction was given this Court to the lower court rather direction was given to the plaintiff-petitioner in the following manner: The learned Counsel further submitted that in any event, the same document should have been marked with objection. In my opinion, as the petitioner may raise all questions at the time of hearing of the suit itself, no interference is necessary with the impugned order at this stage.

(3.) On the other hand, Mr. B.M. Prasad, appearing for the Opposite parties vehemently argued on the maintainability of this Revision application.