Sibghat Ullah Khan, J. - (1.) LIST revised.
(2.) NO one appears for the Respondents. Legal representative of Respondent No. 2 have also not engaged any counsel inspite of sufficient service (substitution application has also been allowed). Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioners.
(3.) IVTH Additional District Judge Mainpuri passed an order on 09.09.1996 in Civil Appeal No. 149 of 1989 Kunwar Bahadur v. Sahab Singh. Petitioners are Respondents in the said appeal. Through the said order some documents sought to be adduced as additional evidence by Appellants/Respondents were taken on record merely on the ground that they were public documents and in order to decide the matter properly those documents were relevant and necessary. It was also mentioned in the said order that in the earlier part of the day when the case was called out both the parties were present and sought time to call their counsel, however, after some time only counsel of the Appellant appeared and neither Respondent nor his counsel appeared. For recalling the order dated 09.09.1996 restoration application was filed which was rejected on 06.01.1997. Both these orders have been challenged through this writ Petition.;