S.P.PANDEY, J. - (1.) THIS is a ref­erence dated 19-4-1994 by the learned Ad­ditional Commissioner, Jhansi Division, Jhansi with his recommendation that the order dated 27-8-1990 passed by the learned trial Court be set aside and the matter in question be remanded to it with the direction that the illegality of the lease concerned be examined on merits in ac­cordance with law and in the light of the observations made in the aforesaid order dated 19-4-1994 passed by the learned lower revisional Court after affording due and reasonable opportunity of hearing and adducing evidence in support of their claims to the parties concerned.
(2.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the revisionist and have also perused the records on file. None appeared on behalf of the opposite-parties despite due notice. For the revisionist, it was issued that this reference be accepted, revision petition be allowed as per the recommen­dation, made by the learned Additional Commissioner. I have carefully and closely ex­amined the aforesaid submission, made by the learned Counsel for the revisionist and the relevant records on file. On an ex­amination of the records, it is amply clear that the learned lower revisional Court has properly examined the points at issue in correct perspective of law and has drawn a conclusion with which I entirely agreed. I see no reason to disagree with the same, as no error of law, fact or jurisdiction has been committed by it in the aforesaid order, dated 19-4-1994. To achieve the ends of substantive natural justice, it is quite just and equitable to remand this case to the learned trial Court for decision afresh in consonance with the provisions of law.
(3.) IN view of the discussions made hereinabove, I come to the conclusion that this reference is worthy of being accepted, the revision petition deserves to be al­lowed and the aforesaid order dated 27-8-1990 passed by the learned trial Court is liable to be set aside.;