BHAGAT RAM Vs. JALAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS a plaintiff's revision The plaintiff had filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 2,410/ - against the defendant. During the pendency of the suit, a compromise is said to have been arrived at between the parties. The plaintiff filed the compromise dated 13 -9 -79 in the court on 28 -4 -80. The learned Munsif is alleged to have held an enquiry whether such a compromise had taken place or not because the defendant denied the same. By his order dated 11 -4 -83, the learned Munsif observed that the compromise appeared to be suspicious in as much as it was scribed by the counsel for the plaintiff and not by any independent person and that this compromise had not been filed in court for a long time although the case had been adjourned a number of times in between. He, therefore, rejected the plaintiff's application dated 28 -4 -80 and directed that the case be proceeded with further. It is against this order that the present revision has been filed by the plaintiff.

(2.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. It is agreed by the learned Counsel that the revision may be disposed of at the stage of admission.

(3.) HAVING arrived at this conclusion, I am left with two courses: either to consider the evidence here and arrive at my own findings, or to direct the learned Munsif to do so. The record of the case has not been called and in these circumstances, the latter course appears to be better.