MAHABUX Vs. GOR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE four applications in revision which arise against an appellate order of the learned Additional Commissioner, Jaipur, dated 30. 5. 1956 shall be disposed of by this judgment as a common point of law is involved in them.

(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and have examined the record of the case. It appears that the plaintiffs opposite-party filed a suit against each one of the applicants for recovery of arrears of rent in the court of the Assistant Collector, Sikar. During the course of proceedings an objection was raised by the counsel for the applicant about the admissibility of a document relied upon by the plaintiff on the ground that it was not duly registered. The learned trial court overruled this objection and allowed the document to be admitted in evidence. Being aggrieved by this order the defendant-applicants filed appeals before the learned Additional Commissioner, Jaipur. He observed that as under sec. 225 (2) of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, read with sec. 104 of the C. P. C, an appeal against such an interlocutory order did not lie to him the same may be dismissed. It is against this order that the applicants have filed these revisions before us.