- (1.) S. P. Pandey, J. This is a second appeal under Section 331 of the UPZA & LR Act preferred against the Mahboob Khan v. Mazhar Ali Khan & Ors. order dated Dceember 29, 1994 passed by the learned Addl. Commissioner, Moradabad Division, Moradab d arising out of an order dated April 11, 1994 passed by the learned trial Court in a suit under Sections 2. 29- B/122-B (4-F) and 209 of the UP ZA & LRAct.
(2.) BRIEF and relevant facts of the ease are that the plaintiffs Kripal and others instituted a suit under Sections 229b/122b (4- F) and 209 of UPZA & LR Act against the defendants Ram Prasad and others with the prayer that he be declared the tenant with transferable rights under Section 122-B (4-F) over the disputed land detained at the foot of the plaint. The learned trial Court by means of its order dated 11- 4-94 decreed the aforesaid suit. Aggrieved by this order an appeal was preferred. The learned Addl. Commissioner has allowed the appeal and set aside the aforesaid order dated April 11, 1994 passed by the learned trial Court. Hence, this second appeal. I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant. None appeared for the respondent. The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that he wants to withdraw the appeal as well as suit with the permission to file a fresh suit. I have carefully examined the aforesaid prayer for withdraw of the ap peal as well as the suit as prayed by the learned Counsel for the appellant and perused the record on file. Having scrutinized the matter in question, 1 find that in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, to my mind the natural justice would be better served if the appellant is allowed to withdraw the suit with permis sion to file a fresh suit within one year.
(3.) IN consequence this second appeal is being disposed of in view of the aforesaid observations. Accordingly, the appellant is allowed to withdraw the ap peal as well as the suit with permission to file a fresh suit within one year. Appeal disposed of. .;