S.P.PANDEY, J. - (1.) THIS is a revision petition against the judgment and order, dated 23-1-2006 passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Chitrakoot Dham Division, Banda in Appeal No. 62 of 2003, remanding the case, in question, under Section 229-B of the UPZA and LR Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), to the learned trial Court, for decision, afresh on merits, according to law, in the light of the observations made in the impugned order.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case, giving rise to the instant revision petition, area that the plaintiff, Shyam Sunder etc. instituted a suit under Section 229-B of the Act for declaration of their rights as bhumidhar, with transferable rights on the land, in dispute, inter-alia, pleading that their father Musammi was entered in Ziman-8 over the land, in dispute, before the Abolition of Zamindari and after its abolition, become bhumidhar thereof and after whose death, they stepped into his shoes by succession and the defendants have no concern with it. On notice, the defendants contested the suit, denying the allegations and inter alia, pleading that the plaintiff have no concern with the land in dispute. The learned trial Court, after completing the requisite trial, decreed the suit of the plaintiff, vide its judgment and decree, dated 29-9-2003. The defendant went up in appeal before the learned Additional Commissioner who has, by his impugned order, remanded the matter, in question, to the learned trial Court for decision, afresh, on merits, according to law and therefore, it is against this remand order that the instant revision petition has been preferred by the revisionist before the Board. I have heard the learned Counsel for the revisionist and have also perused the relevant papers on file. The learned Additional Commissioner has observed that proper and analytical examination of relevant documents on record have not been done by the learned trial Court, a close perusal and proper appreciation of the same is rather necessary for the just and proper decision of the case and therefore, the matter in question, has rightly been remanded to the learned trial Court in the interest of justice. Anyway, the parties have nothing to feel aggrieved or prejudiced, as the doors are still open to have their say, in support of their respective claims and therefore, the contentions of the learned Counsel for the revisionist who has miserably failed to substantiate his claim, are rather untenable for the same reason and as such, I am of the considered opinion that this is rather not a fit case, for admission, which very richly deserves dismissal out right, in limine.
(3.) IN view of the above, this revision petition being not fit for admission, is accordingly, dismissed in limine and the impugned order, passed by the learned Additional Commissioner is hereby, confirmed and maintained. Revision dismissed.;