- (1.) WE have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
(2.) A preliminary objection has been raised that the impugned order dated 27.11.2014, passed by learned Single Judge is an interlocutory order, and thus, the Special Appeal, under the Rules of the Court, is not maintainable.
(3.) IT is contended that the order has been passed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against which the Special Appeal is not maintainable. Reliance has been placed on Sukh Dev Vs. Prakash Chandra, 2010 2 WLC(Raj) 500; Abdul Sami Vs. Additional District Judge No.8 and Another [D.B. Special Appeal(Writ) No.357/2010], decided on 24.11.2010, and Abhishek Mundra Vs. Navratan Mal Jain and Ors.,2011 WLC(Raj) 163. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the appellants that the judgment of learned Single Judge was obtained by playing fraud on the Court. The respondent played a sharp practice on the Court and obtained an ex parte order, by which without setting aside the order of the trial Court, a direction has been issued to decide the objections to the Commissioner's report, afresh.;