- (1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) AN application 68-A was filed for framing the additional issues which was rejected by the Court below by an order dated 5-10-2006. The petitioner filed a revision which was dismissed by an order dated 19- 10-2006. Consequently, the writ petition. In my view, the writ petition is liable to be allowed. The impugned order of the trial Court does not indicate the reason for rejection of the application of the petitioner for framing of the additional issues. On this ground the impugned orders are quashed. The writ petition is allowed and the trial Court is directed to re-decide the application 68-A by a reasoned and speaking order. Petition allowed. RAJESH .;