- (1.) Heard Shri Ramendra Asthana, learned counsel for the revisionist and Shri Arpit Agrawal, learned counsel for the contesting respondents.
(2.) The instant revision is directed against the order dated 07.03.2019 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Fast Track Court, Pilibhit. It appears that two applications were filed in the suit, both under Order VII Rule 11 C.P.C. One application 33-Ka was filed by the revisionist no. 2, the other application 20-Ka was filed by the revisionist no. 7. Both the applications have been decided under the common order.
(3.) A preliminary objection has been raised by Shri Arpit Agarwal that both the applicants who had filed the applications under Order VII Rule 11 C.P.C. were necessarily required to file separate revisions. However, a single revision has been filed by them arraying also, other persons as revisionists who had never filed the application under Order VII Rule 11 C.P.C. Therefore, the revision is defective and needs to be dismissed on this ground alone.;